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
Did she though? I´m not convinced at all.
Yes, having someone other than James Bond as 007 is an intriguing idea. I wouldn't be against it and wouldn't be surprised if it happened now or in the future. The only issue is establishing the identity of the new 007, without the universally known martinis, Aston Martins and catchphrases. (I suppose MI6 supplies Astons so that could carry on)
What would be so wrong with letting the strong black female lead have her own character, instead of Pressing her into a man´s role?
@boldfinger :
https://deadline.com/2019/05/phoebe-waller-bridge-bond-1202624860/
“There’s been a lot of talk about whether or not [the Bond franchise] is relevant now because of who he is and the way he treats women,” she said. “I think that’s bollocks. I think he’s absolutely relevant now. It has just got to grow. It has just got to evolve, and the important thing is that the film treats the women properly. He doesn’t have to. He needs to be true to this character.”
You may not be convinced, but these are her words, and, if you've seen her work, she's very committed to her vision (whether in Season One of Killing Eve, or both seasons of Fleabag); her vision for James bond is right there-- the world may've changed around him, but he needs to be true to who he is. Lovely.
It's just a gimmick, folk. Just that. Nothing more. Have you heard Broccoli's recent interviews? And Phobe's for that matter.
Don't worry. It'll all work out rather nicely, I'm sure.
PS: @PanchitoPistoles, I don't know where you're from, but I think you should run for president. That being said, are you sure your middle name doesn't start with a J.? Cause then I would understand your moniker. That would really be ironic. To the max.
We really do :)
Guys, if it were 2006 all over again, how some of us would have reacted to the news and rumors that:
- the new Bond was blond
- there wouldn't be any gun barrel scene in the first few seconds
- there would be black and white
- Bond makes a lot of mistakes
etc.?
Many people here want things to change... unless they change in a remotely "threatening" way, and then it's heresy. They don't actually want any change, they want some shuffling of elements that have already been seen a couple of times in the previous films. This ultimately resulted in the franchise being a few times as petrified as Roger's face in AVTAK.
What if the new (temporary) 007 was a black woman? Another question would be what if the new (temporary) 007 wasn't a black woman? We've seen some other 00 agents. All white males. Either they turn into faceless agents that aren't as good as Bond (Thunderball), or some dead meat (Octopussy, The Living Daylights where they even hired Lazenby and Moore lookalikes) that, once again, are meant to highlight Bond by comparison, or we have a negative double of Bond (Alec Trevelyan, possibly Silva).
Having a black woman as a 00 agent in Bond 25, even the one that takes the 007 code number, hints that she won't just be a glorified extra or an opponent to Bond. It helps establishing her as someone distinctive enough. As I've said, reusing the 007 code number for another agent wouldn't be as shocking as some people assume it is. In the narrative, it just means that there was an important amount of time since Bond was in the service. With years, even his achievements have faded (the time he went rogue... or the time he went rogue... or the time he went rogue and had M killed... or the time he went rogue and didn't finish the job), resulting in M reattributing the 007 code number to a new 00 agent. The audience knows that Bond will get the 007 number back at some point (hell, it will even be at the beginning of the titles in a large font, "DANIEL CRAIG as IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007". How's that for reassuring?)
Ultimately, either she dies, or something happens involving Bond and the number seven, which causes Nomi or M to give him his old code number for sentimental reasons and to close the dispute over the two "007"s.
Anyway, a scene with M and Tanner set in London so late in the script may be the moment he's given his old code number back.
Though it looks like the clickbait headline that "007 is a black female" is confusing people. Even the cooler heads in the comment section of the Daily Mail seem to admit to their confusion and once they read the article realise this is a "non story".
A small smattering of the array of responses:
People! James Bond is still Daniel Craig. The '007' monkier has been handed down. It's not rocket science.
Boy oh boy, that trailer is going to have to be damned good to convince me otherwise. Unlike previous Bond movies, I'm going to hold off until I've read the reviews before booking my ticket.
Yep, some people can be so dense.
@bondsum, have you see Barbara Broccoli's interview in which see states there are better roles for women than James Bond, because the character was created as a man? She gave that interview in Jamaica, just the other day. Then Phoebe whatshername came and said James Bond should remain faithful to his character and not change because the world around him has. Which was straight out of Fleming, btw.
This is what keeps me confident that this is just a gimmick, and a fun one at that, if they do it well.
Sure, this is not the stand alone slightly formulaic adventure I, as a straight white male, want to see. The thing is, why can't a straight white male have something to identify with nowadays? But I guess I'll have to make do with plots and characters from the Craig universe, Craig himself, and a lot of formula messing around that's been around since 2006. I, for one, enjoyed this tenure so far, Craig and all, really, I really did and do. And I want this film to be in line with all of that. Now, if I want this for Bond26? I'd say, no. But then again, I'm the one who wanted straight adaptations for the Fleming novels all along.
All and all, it's just a gimmick. So will be
Those who can appreciate that and desire other things completely different at the same time, as I do, will endure this better, I believe.
Being an adult is making peace with having antagonistical feelings at the same time. It's being lucid about this sort of thing. Not hysterical. So, if I end up eating humble pie, as you say, It'll eat it, knowing that at least I didn't ruin the production process fun by being overly negative, dense and hysterically fobic. Not saying you are, @bondsum. Just saying you should keep an open mind. For your sake. See? I do care ;)
Yeah, I mentioned this on the previous page. There's definitely more to her character than meets the eye, and I wouldn't be surprised if she ended up being a turncoat of some description.
Predictable.
I'd love that.
It will be just another gimmick, in the very same vein as Eve end up being Moneypenny and not a field agent. Lynch will be the new agent 007, Bond will be a visitor, an ex-00 agent (the first one who retired without dying, maybe, since the others are probably dead). Bond won't recover his 00 status, probably. Heck, he'll probably be missing in action by the end of it all, presumed dead...again. It'll probably all be left wide open. And then Bond26 will be its own thing. With a new James Bond being the 00(7) we are used to. A new beginning, hopefully, without these gimmicks that have been around since 2006 and have become, IMO, as tiresome as the formula itself was back in 2002. For Bond26, I say just do James Bond as it should be, gun barrel and all, and be bloody proud of it, instead of embarrassed. As for now, let's conclude the Craig era with the bang it deserves, and with the gimmicks its used to.
You can't moan that they're not doing anything new or original, and then when they do you still moan.
And how many times do Eon and people have to say that James Bond won't be a female.
007 and James Bond are complete different things, so just get over it. If you're enjoyment of a film is based on whether a character has a number attatched to them then I'm sorry but you need to sort out your priorities.
There's much more that can go wrong with a film than that. Jesus.
Thank you!
If only she didn’t look so man-like. ☹️
When James Bond became '007' in CR, it really affected him mentally. Remember that look after he killed Fisher? When he tended to his wounds after killing Obanno? When he sat with Vesper in the shower? When he could hardly stare at Solange's body?
He had his armour up and wouldn't let anyone see past the cold-heartened assassin. The only person who saw past it was Vesper.
If Nomi has just become '007' then Bond knows that beneath her bravado there is a broken person struggling with her decisions.
This goes full circle and I absolutely love it.
This exact scenario was suggested here by @talos7 about a month ago.
Everything you say is true, but her inheriting the 007 moniker is irrelevant regard what you say - that’s the gimmick.
Thank you, thank you, 😉
Indeed. There's plenty of validity in what @Pierce2Daniel is saying thematically, but it certainly is a gimmick and I also don't know if they'll really spend all that much time developing such a character driven strand that isn't Bond-centric in Craig's final film. Especially considering the already sizeable number of elements already in play.