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
I saw The Gentlemen yesterday and have been thinking about Henry Golding, since (Aside: I would take any of Colin Farrell, Charlie Hunnam, Hugh Grant, Jeremy Strong, Tom Wu, Samuel West, Eddie Marsan or Bugzy Malone in a Bond film, but none of them as Bond). Apart from the fashion, this isn't a particularly Bondy role and he hasn't completely blown me away, but here and in Crazy Rich Asians he has an undeniable charm and presence about him, to a point where he might be too good looking for a secret agent.
What I was specifically thinking about were the various discussions we had on here about some actors looking to young. I had always kind of dismissed that, but seeing him at 34 (30 when Crazy Rich Asians was shot, 31 in The Gentlemen) he looks more mature than say a Nic Hoult, who is only two years younger than him or James Norton, who is actually older than him.
And he is clean-shaven most of the time ;)
I guess he's better in it than Charlie Hummam, who isn't convincing at all as a hard man and just generally comes across as a blank. And you've got Hugh Grant and McConaughey being proper stars in it.
But I guess that's not fashionable anymore.
But what’s interesting is that, from the handicap, to endless ethnicities, sexual identities and many others, more and more various groups are expressing “ outrage “ when someone is cast who isn’t, in real life, the character they’re portrayed.
This isn’t limited to gay and straight, but within that context there’s often a bit of hypocrisy going on; within the gay community there would be those who would be “ outraged “ if , because of his sexuality, a gay actor was not cast as Bond, but, many of those same people would be “ outraged “ if a straight actor were to be cast in a gay roll.
Great actor who has a varied portfolio of roles. He is not a big name star either which I believe is the way the casting process should take into account. Daniel Craig was not a household name until he became James Bond. He performed alongside household names in some renowned movies before but Bond was what elevated him to stardom. James Bond is the blockbuster attraction. That character is uniquely coveted for that reason.
Couldn't agree more. Luke Evans looks great for the part, IMO. Also made an excellent Dracula. I'd much rather see a Bond who has some mileage in his facial features rather than a young kid who looks like he probably doesn't even know who Roger Moore was.
I think it comes from the fact that historically in film/tv/media, straight white men are overwhelmingly overrepresented, so if there's a character that doesn't adhere to one of those three characteristics, we should give that work to an actor that can more accurately represent that character.
Outrage towards a straight character not being portrayed by a gay actor is not something I've ever seen, but to me that would only make sense if they intentionally did not cast an actor for the sole reason that they were gay.
For example, if Aidan Turner was cast as the seventh Bond, I highly doubt I'd see a headline that says "GAY ACTOR NOT CAST AS BOND, CAUSES OUTRAGE" or what have you.
On the other hand, though, if Luke Evans did an interview and revealed something along the lines of "I was screen tested and we were in the final steps of putting me in as James Bond, and then Barbara found out I was gay and suddenly I was out", I could see outrage (justified, IMO) outrage stemming from that hypothetical situation.
Outrage towards a gay character being portrayed by a straight actor is not something I've seen either, and we've recently had Remi Malek and Benedict Cumberbatch both portray famously gay historical figures. I don't doubt there were some people who were upset that these characters weren't portrayed by gay actors, but society at large seems like it was fine with these casting choices, and I would have trouble passing judgement onto someone who was upset about the casting for my above-mentioned reasons.
It's unfair to expect the solutions to inequality to be immediately and perfectly fair.
Couldn't agree more with the last part of your post, but in the context of the discussion, I can't help but feel like you're referring to gay people as perverts?
I don t mind perverts, let that be stated.
The only issue for Evans for me is his age, but I think he's similar to Craig in the sense that he could convincingly play Bond into his 50's, but this likely would still put a ticking clock on his run and effectively eliminate any "early years" type reboot.
I think Evans could probably play Bond into his '50's and be great. At this point I wouldn't really want an early years re-boot. Eon did a superb job giving us an origin story for Bond in CR, which I feel was a masterpiece.
I wouldn't want to know how they'd intend to "prove" an actor's sexual orientation! ;)
And I agree, it's easy to see how something like this undermines the idea of acting; the idea, inherently, is to portray someone who you're not.
With regards to "wouldn't it work the other way too?" In an ideal world, yes, but IMO it's a pendulum swing; it has swung far in one direction, and it's unfair (IMO) to expect the pendulum to suddenly stop in the perfect center.
Hm, how would you know?
I don't think equality always means that things should be the same for both sets of people: more it means that there's a levelling up required.
You make a very good point! :D They do seem to travel a lot...
It's a weird one. I know places like Twitter aren't the majority but it's one hell of an echo chamber for a vocal minority that can and has caused serious damage to people's reputations. I remember people going crazy and "cancelling" JK Rowling for her comments regarding her position on the trans community. Elizabeth Olsen had to quit social media due to the harassment she endured because she didn't make a statement that was scheduled in time with the timeline of MCU fans about Chadwick Boseman's death and we have Eddie Redmayne lamenting his role for the Danish Girl (which he won an Oscar for) to avoid backdated backlash. You can't sneeze these days without grossly offending someone.
As for his sexuality... I don't care as long as he can pull off straight, hetero "up for it" male. Actors act. It's madness that this is a topic of conversation (though I have said before it would likely come up for some).