Home › Bond Movies › Actors
Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
Casting a Mr. Moneypenny?
It seems unlikley that Naomie Harris would or should be playing the new miss Moneypenny in Skyfall, and more than likley the Moneypenny charector won't appear untill Bond 24to when the new M is in full controle of MI6.
What I'd like to discss here is the potential for re-inventing the Moneypenny charector as a gay man. It won't be long untill the Bond franchise is going to have to adress homosexuality in some way, and as I'm sure most would agree, that will be a dificult thing to do right, seeing as most people arn't going to want to see Bond go Bi. That would never happen. However, having the Moneypenny charector as a gay man would allow homosexuality to be fairly represented in the franchise, and in my opinion, make for a really funny charector dialogue.
Imaging it, back when Louis Maxwell played Moneypenny, she and Bond always had a sexy banter going on, and yet you knew thet those two were never actually going to go out to dinner or see eachother at all outside work. It's a professional relationship that they both play up to give one another a good laugh during work. I think the exact same thing could happen with a gay man in the role of Moneypenny, because thay could have the same fun, semi-sexual banter, without it being wierd because you know that they'll never actually see oneanother. I think it would be really funny, and a perfect way to re-invent the Moneypenny charector.
Share your thoughts, I'm really curious to see what people think about this.
What I'd like to discss here is the potential for re-inventing the Moneypenny charector as a gay man. It won't be long untill the Bond franchise is going to have to adress homosexuality in some way, and as I'm sure most would agree, that will be a dificult thing to do right, seeing as most people arn't going to want to see Bond go Bi. That would never happen. However, having the Moneypenny charector as a gay man would allow homosexuality to be fairly represented in the franchise, and in my opinion, make for a really funny charector dialogue.
Imaging it, back when Louis Maxwell played Moneypenny, she and Bond always had a sexy banter going on, and yet you knew thet those two were never actually going to go out to dinner or see eachother at all outside work. It's a professional relationship that they both play up to give one another a good laugh during work. I think the exact same thing could happen with a gay man in the role of Moneypenny, because thay could have the same fun, semi-sexual banter, without it being wierd because you know that they'll never actually see oneanother. I think it would be really funny, and a perfect way to re-invent the Moneypenny charector.
Share your thoughts, I'm really curious to see what people think about this.
This discussion has been closed.
^ 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
Don't take this personal but I'd suggest you run your text through a spelling checker or something before you post it if you don't mind.
Also, just for the record, I'm not gay, I just thought this would be funny/interesting take on the charector of Moneypenny...
Totally understand, no worries.
I actually got the idea while I was watching an episode of Archer, which is a spoof on Bond in a way. You're right, it does seem like a spoofy idea, but if they cast it right, wrote it right, and got the right director, I feel like they could pull it off. I also get the feeling that this is something that Craig would love to do, although that's only a hunch...
It's inevitable.
2) We've had gay characters in the Bonds before, surprisingly enough most of them were featured in the first decade of the film series.
3) A gay male MP is a ridiculous idea, on the same level of suggesting that we could replace the Aston Martin DB5 with a dog.
4)
Indeed, it is.
Imagine a gay Moneypenny in LALD? There would have been a punch up in front of dear old Bernard Lee! And what about in TND when Moneypenny catches Bond with the cunning linguist? He would have been so bitchy and put the phone down
I'm stupefied each time I read comments from people imagining 'funny' moments in the Bond films, where funny equals head slapping ridiculous, on par with what toddlers can process. Whatever happened to intelligent humour, one of our beloved series' proud elements?
So, we have option A, a gay male MP for the sake of fighting homophobia, and option B, a gay male MP for moronic laughs. Look, there are better ways to destroy the franchise. I choose option C: no gay male MP, which is just common sense.
I don't really want to see a male gay Bond, primarily because I'm a traditionalist when it comes to the series and I like the fundamental relationships to remain the same. I can see the potential comedy value in a male 'Miss' Moneypenny, but really the Bond series is camp enough without this.
I've swung back to the NO side. If she was indeed to become MP, I think it might have been "proved" by now, much like some other major developments in the film have been confirmed by independent digging.
MP, I brazenly speculate, will be revealed with a quick little reveal at the end of the film, which will be tagged to an even bigger reveal. And we shall all exit the theatre dazzled by the iconic-moment-of-it-all, already digging deep for another viewing.
Go to the early show, so you can catch the next show right after. :D
So your money is on a currently unknown extra cast member being Moneypenny? Or could it be Helen McCrory after all? The producers could have just lied about her role in the film. She looks the part I think.
And we have no idea who the actress is?
Maybe it is Harris after all.
I've now talked myself back to the YES side. Tune in next week.
Why? Since there appears to be a desire around here to put some emphasis on the fact of a character being gay, why does it make any sense at all to have a gay Q?
Wint and Kidd came as a pair. Their being gay created a certain dynamic for said pair. Klebb's interest in Tanya resulted in an interesting atmosphere during the mission briefing. As for Pussy, her being gay made it a true challenge for Bond to get her where he usually takes the lovely girls: in his bed.
NONE of the above could be achieved with a gay Q or a gay MP. It's always just the one of them; there's never a significant other around and don't get any ideas either. The Bonds aren't a sitcom or soap series. We don't care about these C level characters' personal lives to such an extent where we would want to see potential partners. Next, to have a gay male MP or a gay Q deployed for the obvious scene: one where they start hitting on Bond, would be totally absurd! Bond couldn't possibly answer such feelings, not even jokingly, or 99,5 % of the fans would be utterly upset. Bond could of course respond harshly and negatively, creating an unsettling incident that could damage the film. Last option is for Bond to respond in a very neutral sense, which renders the whole gay set-up useless from the start.
People need to consider the purpose of having these beloved characters turned gay before they start making wild suggestions. Q has never been anything besides businesslike and MP's always been fond of Bond. Why change that? It makes no sense. In what way could we possibly benefit from such a thing? What extra values does this add to the series and to our viewing experience? None.
Do I have issues with gay characters? Of course not. Some of the most interesting characters so far were gay. I DO have issues though with giving a character certain characteristic for the sake of it and without considering any particular reasons why, especially when we're dealing with beloved, well-established characters like Q, MP, M and Bond. We can't change them a single bit or we'd be screwing with five decades of Bond legacy. And for what? Because it's "special" to make a character gay? This, if nothing else, is the right way to induce anti-homo comments. No-one's ever complained about DAF because it featured gay henchmen. People will, however, respond fiercely when MP turns into a gay male. The very reason to have MP around since 1962 is because of those comedy driven scenes of the woman with desires for Bond, trying desperately to defy his jokes and all-talk-no-play attitude. Why blow that?
You got ahead of posting this. My post as Q & Miss Moneypenny must return That over 200 member express the comment although got the new Q but no Miss Moneypenny yet. Yell I wish they cast her but look like Bond 24.
Sorry sireanisbond but there is a real difference between an older woman and a gay man. The Bond franchise would lose all the credibility it has tried to win back with Craig's first two movies. Whilst Skyfall will proberbly be more lighthearted and fun compared to the last two movies, my fear would be that if Bond were to have a cheeky flirt with a gay MP it could reduce the series to a Carry On movie. Also I would think that some may find it offensive that a gay character could be reduced to nothing more than a outdated cliched comic role based on the running joke of their sexuality.
I can image the scene now. Bond to MP - "Moneypenny, do you have 5 mins free?" MP replies "Oh James, I'm free! (In the style of sit-com Are you being served?) and I'll give you 15 mins, if you have the stammina, oh I am naughty! Bond to MP, "Good old Moneypenny, always UP for the challange. I need you for some DIC-tation..... etc.....
See my point?
Good Lord. Thank God you have nothing to do with the production of these movies.
The purpose of Q to Bond has never been sexual. Q's purpose is to supply Bond with equipment. Moneypenny is another story: her character is all about flirtation with Bond.
But sexual orientation isn't all about sex. It's about who a person is. And a gay Q could add a potentially interesting detail to a fairly one-note, stock character.
Did it bother you when they made Felix Leiter black, or M a woman? And if it did, why did it? Did their new race or gender change the underlying purpose of the character? A change in sexual orientation for someone who is not a romantic interest for Bond would be the same thing.
I disagree. Firstly, skin colour and even gender do not attract specific attention to them. Sexual preferences need to be either spelled out or demonstrated by obvious actions. I wonder in what sense that could help a Bond movie. Secondly, what sort of potentially interesting details could be added to Q if he were made gay? The very purpose of this character is to give Bond his tools. Anything that adds more weight to this character would feel out of place. In Q's case, being one-note is actually a good thing. Thirdly, sex is a far more intimate part of our lives than the colour of our skin or our gender. It's illogical to claim that they play on the exact same level.