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
100% correct.
Yes I know he is gay. Didnt think that would be a problem though. Seen him in interviews and he comes across a little too posh for the film Bond, but I don't think his sexuality is an issue.
I agree, since an actor is an actor, and part of that is portraying a character that may not be in line with the actor's own sexual (or other) orientation. It's just that the public expects Bond to be heterosexual for the time being, no matter if the actor in private is gay. In other words, the problem may be less in the actor's personal choice than if the James Bond character were changed to also being gay. The latter, like it or not, may not exactly be to the liking of the majority of Bond fans and therefore would backfire.
why would the character be changed to being gay? Gay actor or not there would be no reason to. You could make him gay without a gay actor playing him.
Let actors' private lives remain exactly that. I don't care at all about Daniel Craig's heterosexuality in his own life, I don't imagine many others do either.
Craig wears a flat-cap in his own time. How un-Bond!!
Shouldn't matter if they're American either, provided they're a good enough actor. The only thing that should (and does) matter is how we'll they're able to portray the character when the cameras are rolling, and the requisite marketing.
Gay men can be big alpha males too.
Exactly. Absolutely nothing wrong with a gay actor in the role. Hasn't Luke Evans been mentioned as a future 007? I believe he is gay but has no problem playing 'straight' parts.
I mainly like the sunnier/lighter atmosphere in the Moore films and in some of the Connery films. TLD is also one of my favourites. And there are many things I like in every Bond film...
Nice, TLD is a classic favourite of mine as well.
@FatherValentine I mention Luke Evans every chance I get. ;) He is, and he doesn't.
Every good looking British actor who was seen in a tuxedo. Whether they are manly or not.
Controversial opinion : I'd rather have relatively unknown veteran actors to play villains, rather than stars or Oscar winning actors.
Evans could give masculinity lessons to many straight men. Everett, not so much.
James Bond at the end of the day is a tool to make money with and the actor playing him has become an important tool. Craig & Brosnan both have taken very much care of how they showed themselves out there in media land and any slip-up they found their selves in a unwanted media-hype.
James Bond will remain male, heterosexual, white and British I expect any other choice might end the franchise.
It's impossible to disagree with anything you've said here. Even still, I'd be disappointed if EON declined casting an actor because they were gay, despite all the correct points you've mentioned. Maybe I'm an idealist, but IMO it's a rational person's responsibility to go to war with homophobia/intolerance.
It's why I overextend myself fighting things I see as wrong on the boards here at times. :P As some more level headed members here would say, it's best to just move past things you don't agree with, and I agree to a certain extent, but sometimes I feel too you have to make the other opinion known.
He was eventually deemed too old at the time hence why he didn’t get the part (or he declined it, can’t remember exactly).
He would have been a fantastic Bond no doubt, probably in the same tongue in cheek manner of Moore but I can’t honestly have regrets as we got the ultimate Bond in Connery.
Just watched Randolph Scott's Budd Boetticher westerns recently and had no idea he was gay/bisexual. He certainly puts to bed the (stupid) idea that a gay/bi man can't play rugged and masculine heterosexual roles. You couldn't find a more masculine man than Randolph Scott!
I agree. I couldn't me a bigger opponent of shallow identity politics, but there is simply no logical reason whatsoever why a gay actor couldn't play a 'straight' role and vice versa. It goes beyond being 'progressive' or fighting homophobia and intolerance (although important of course). It's just pure sense and logic. The same as if an actor was a die hard socialist or whatever - he could still play Bond.
I agree it should not be a problem, but a movie industry runs on perceptions and it can kill a career immediately
Yes, very entertaining movie, probably my favourite after TSWLM. I really enjoyed the LEGO version someone had posted some days ago: (I had never noticed how close the chasers really were, close to the border) Fortunately, this time it was only a LEGO cello that got damaged.
My hunch is the media would probably make the casting of an openly gay actor as Bond the primary focus (rather than the film itself) in terms of publicity.
Doesn't matter to me either way, as my controversial opinion still stands:
I believe NTTD will probably be the last Bond film we get for a very long time, if ever.
I know that sounds dire but I imagine there's a lot of great talent within the community.
I agree though that the future of EON Bond films, as they are now, is tenuous.
I think with Cubby Bond was his life and primary passion, thus the reason there was a new film every other year. Barbara and Michael, on the other hand have other interests and enjoy producing the Bond films every once in awhile, just to keep the legacy and memory alive.
After NTTD, I could completely understand if they want to take a massive break, not be bothered with recasting and re-thinking the franchise's approach.
Perhaps bring Bond back in say, 20 years for a one off film?
I hope I'm mistaken and NTTD gives Eon it's second wind and inspiration to fast track B26.
Many possibilities.
(1) Eon are a business and they need to generate turnover. They need to create income now in order that they can survive and therefore create income in the future. Bond is their biggest asset and unique ISP. No one else can legally use the character. So Eon will continue to create Bond product. Sorry for sounding so capitalist there but at the end of the day Eon exist in a market, and Bond is the biggest and flashiest product that they can put on their stall.
(2) After 2036 (I think) the JB character is out of copyright. Copyright law is very clear. So we will continue to see JB films or TV after then too, just not made by Eon.
So the future looks ok to me