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
Yes that’s what we’re saying, glad you agree. The Broccolis won’t change one but they may change the other.
As you say, that is all, no need to speak about it any further.
No I think that’s unlikely, fans and the general audience quite often have different priorities. Fans are certainly less progressive by their very nature, it’s just logical.
Absolutely, he’s very high on my lists of potential Bonds
And let’s not be so short sighted to fling poo at only one demographic. Articles were so quick to pile on and go after the fans that were against Jodie Whittaker. But where was this same positivity when fan girls were throwing a fit that Matt Smith should be replaced by a wrinkly old man. I do love a good double standard. Plus those who only want outside the box casting, just to piss off the fans. That is just childish.
I think Bond should remain white, but I am under no illusion that Bond will stay that way. If not the 7th actor, then maybe the 8th. But it IS going to happen.
But more people than ever did watch it. Then it turned out to be not very good, so the ratings gradually fell again. The gender change won them viewers, then the awful episodes lost them.
I’m not saying they should use that as a model of how to (I think it’s a really impressive feat of failure, taking all that goodwill and attention and pissing it away), but we were talking about how general audiences would respond, and I think Doctor Who is a sign of how bold casting like that can grab attention. It suddenly became part of the national consciousness again over night, after years of waning interest during Capaldi. Casting a POC as Bond would garner even more publicity, you’d immediately get eyes all over the world on the brand again. People who hadn’t bothered with Bond films for years would be curious about how it’d be. Where Doctor Who went wrong was failing to actually make the show any good. If EON went bold with the casting, drummed up that curiosity, and then followed it up with a really good film, then they could turn a lot of that curiosity into new fans.
I’m not using this as an argument in favour of casting a POC either, as I’ve said before, I really don’t mind either way. But I do think it’s a commercially viable option, and that audiences as a whole wouldn’t reject it like fans on here would.
The question remains dear @MajorDSmythe , for what reason? That's the sensitive point for both the yay and nay sides.
I have a much better solution. CREATE a new character, a black fellow in this case but could also be of Asian descent. After all we want to keep the options open and not only favour one other 'colour' because they tend to be more vocal/ supported. How hard is it to CREATE a cracking new suave male agent? Exactly, there aren't any reasons not to. In fact it is more logical than to paint Bond a color he never was, for the heck of it.
Absolutely.
There are so many plausible candidates, but few who can be categorically locked in.
Bond has never been a character who was easy to cast. In my lifetime I’ve experienced three, now four actor changes.
When Roger Moore stood down, I don’t recall Timothy Dalton being on any lists to take the role.
When it came time to find Bond #5 it has to be said that Pierce Brosnan was the top choice with the public, and many fans. He really was the most popular choice methinks.
And then we got Daniel Craig. Casting completely out of left field. Everyone was taken aback by EON’s choice, and many were annoyed and let down by this choice. But not all fans nor the public felt this way clearly. And after five films over 15-16 years it comes to recast the most famous role in cinema.
With the popularity of Daniel Craig to the general audience casting Bond #7 could be akin to recasting when Sean Connery left the role.
That may sound overly dramatic, but Daniel Craig has been a popular James Bond. And this role has never been cast on a whim.
Interestingly the UK government recognises 18 ethnic groups in 5 categories (white, black, asian, mixed, other); so although I tend to agree with you on the definition of the word, I guess the government sees it as defined by race. Fair enough I guess.
I don't think there would be any point in Eon creating a new Bond-style character because they have the best one already. If they want to change very slightly it it's up to them. In fact there really isn't any point in anyone creating a Bond knock-off, because Bond knock-offs are always obviously just that, and never as good as the real thing.
You did say 'that is all' in your last message on the matter, I guess it wasn't! :D
I feel like we're on the cusp of the usual Laurence Fox-style "no, to make him black would ACTUALLY be the racist thing to do!" non-point :)
People wouldn’t watch it. “Just make new characters” is a nice idea but that’s not how the blockbuster landscape is anymore, and Hollywood didn’t just decide to be that creatively bankrupt on a whim. The rise of streaming (so much content available 24/7) and the death of anything original at the cinema (people just don’t seem to want to go for anything other than an established franchise, we were the only ones in our screening of The Last Duel) means that anything that isn’t an established brand is finding it harder and harder to get a look in. People love slagging Hollywood off for their unoriginality, myself included, but really, aren’t they just giving people what they want? The film industry is a business and studios will always follow the money. And all of us on here are culpable in that too (how much money have we spent on Bond that could’ve gone to something new and original?) so while that’s really annoying, I‘m not even sure we have the right to moan about it.
Well what was the reason for a blonde Bond? Or for casting that Scottish lorry driver against the author’s wishes? Because the actors were really good. Just as there could be plenty of black and asian actors out there who’d also be really good. And seeing as we’ve already had Bonds of varying heights, eye colour, hair colour, personality, etc, I don’t see why race should be such an uncrossable line. Bond is a flexible concept, that’s why it’s lasted so long, and how long it’s lasted has turned it into a cultural lightning rod. A sign of the ever changing times, and the time we’re in is more diverse than ever. I think it’d be nice to give people of different backgrounds the opportunity to play a national icon, and I don’t see any reason why it couldn’t work. You could slot a black actor into the last few films and not have to alter a line of the script. I don’t think you need him to be white to embody the upper class Britishness he represents anymore.
Exactly! Babs and Craig even said there should be good roles created for women rather than make Bond a woman. The same logic applies to a person of colour. Create a leading espionage role for a person of colour instead of hijacking an already established and clearly defined IP.
Also, the more publicity talking point doesn't make sense. Bond isn't starving for publicity. It's a brand that sells itself and been going for almost 70 years! NTTD is the highest grossing film of the year and if I'm not mistaken the highest grossing film of the pandemic. I think it's fair to say publicity isn't remotely an issue. Bond doesn't need a non white actor to drum up interest, it's been doing this successfully for 60 years! So, what reason other than stunt casting is there to change Bond into a non white character?
Some people get pissed if someone doesn't return an item back in it's proper place or if they reposition a piece of furniture. Imagine if someone comes along and changes the whole ethnicity/skin colour/culture of an established and iconic character like Bond for no reason. That's blatant disrespect. Let's see a black Tarzan and a white Mowgli before we introduce a melinated James Bond.
When it comes to racism, saying "I don't want a black James Bond" isn't the same as saying "I don't want a black dentist" or "I don't want a black postman". I think some people see it the same. It isn't.
Outside of the Avengers movies Black Panther is the highest grossing comic book film of all time $1.3Billion. Why do you think that is? And yet, Far From home is the only spidey film to cross a $Billion, No Thor film has crossed $900Milliom and it's getting a 4th film.
Come up with a concept, give it a good budget, get great talent behind and in front of the camera, cast your leading actor of colour and market the film accordingly for people to show up and then there wouldn't really be a problem.
Yes that's very true, but I guess they knew it was going to be good, and they knew Craig would be excellent as well; it wasn't a reckless decision but a calculated one from a position of knowledge and confidence.
But you said:
They're apples to otanges, except when the same logic applies :D
Bloody good question, that. There's an awful lot of green haired slacktivists on Twitter that would throw round words like 'Toxic' and 'Problematic'. But it is those same people, who bitch and moan to get a big change to happen in a film or tv property, then when they get what they wanted, they bugger off and complain about something else. Otherwise known as moving the goalposts.
You'd think that creating more roles for non-white actors would be a good thing.
Fast and Furious started over twenty years ago now, in a very different blockbuster landscape, while Black Panther is part of an established IP. Obviously we should get new roles for people of all races. But we’re talking about blockbuster heroes specifically. And when was the last time an original blockbuster, not based on anything or attached to any established brand, really set the world alight? @JeremyBondon’s exact suggestion was a suave, Bond esque superspy, because of course “Bond but xyz” is a tried and tested pitch that has never ever failed. Since the spy craze of the 60s ended, has a pitch like that ever really worked? I can think of one example, Kingsman, and that’ll bomb this December when it goes up against bigger franchises. Don’t think they’ll make a fourth.
Original blockbusters are a dying breed, apart from straight to streaming ones with hugely established stars that get lost in all the noise. And I think race and gender swapped reboots are just an unavoidable consequence of that. Our collective reluctance to watch anything that we have no childhood attachment to shouldn’t impede the chance of kids of all backgrounds to see themselves in those escapist sorts of films.
I’d be okay with them removing that if they ever race swapped the role, but to be honest if we’re being that firm about it, then I don’t think Roger Moore should’ve had it either. I love him and his take on the role, but he was essentially playing a whole new character imo. Would his loveably smug, carry on spying sort of hero really be closer to the source material than a POC who acts exactly like the Bond of the books, even if he doesn’t look like him?
We’re not talking about comics though, we’re talking about blockbusters with budgets of hundreds of millions, being released at a time where there’s more stuff to watch and entertainment options than ever. Any new IP of a Bond sort of scale would be a massive risk that studios are becoming more and more reluctant to take. The only completely original blockbusters nowadays tend to be 80s style ones, in the sense that they’re tied to stars whose presence is an IP in itself because they’re the same in everything (The Rock, Ryan Renyolds), and even those sort of stars are getting fewer and fewer in number, IP is what sells now. The Last Duel had a Disney marketing campaign, Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Adam Driver, a popular up and comer in Jodie Comer, Ridley Scott directing, critical acclaim, and it still just died on its arse (COVID likely didn’t help obviously, but it did very poorly even taking that into account). I don’t think the studios would be so risk adverse if they thought original stuff would actually take off, since they’ll doubtlessly have people to analyse and focus group every aspect of these films.
People wanting Bond to stay white is fair enough, they’re entitled to their opinion, but I really don’t think “just make new characters” is the simple solution people seem to think when we’re talking about blockbusters of this scale. That was the line on here ten years ago, and has it happened? We’ve had a more diverse set of superhero characters adapted as part of the ongoing, pre-established universes. And that’s great. But it’s not really the same as just making a new Bond style blockbuster adventure series, that sort of thing is rarer. If the studios thought that was viable option then that’s what they’d be doing, but clearly there isn’t the market for it in comparison to sequels and reboots. We could say just make new characters in other mediums, and get them adapted into films, but that’s easier said than done, and it doesn’t really address the issue of representation in film now.
Hmm, not sure I see It. Though I’m sure the same words were said about Craig back in 2005.
Yes they are apples and oranges but that doesn't mean they can't share the sane principle.
Exactly and not only that, @thelivingroyale you completely missed the point I was making. There's a reason why I mentioned several other Marvel films who have already been established before black panther and yet haven't crossed a Billion or in spider-man's case, the most popular comic book character in the world hadn't touched a $Billion after having a cinematic presence for 17 years. Like I said, the work needs to be put in, just like Bond's put in the work for 60 years. That's how you're mostly going to get iconic status. In Black Panther's case, the character made a strong impression in Civil War and irrespective of what you feel about the Black Panther movie itself, the character, Ryan Coogler and the cast were a collective draw that had a 4 quadrant appeal so big it started a global cultural movement and had people who wouldn't normally go and see action/comic book films come out and see it. Domestically it was the highest grossingvfilm of 2018, beating Avengers Infinity War. So NO it's not just because the film is part of the MCU otherwise all or more MCU films would have crossed s Billion, especially characters like Thor and especially spidey who debuted the same time black Panther did for his first appearance but wasn't able to hit a $Billiom for his solo MCU film.
Talent, work and consistency is what's needed. Not piggy backing and hijacking other IPs.
I’m not saying that was the only reason it did well, although I think you’re naive if you think it would’ve done anywhere near as well without the Marvel brand. I’m saying that it probably would’ve been too risky a bet for them to greenlight in the first place without that brand backing them up. Worth a read
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2021/02/13/hollywood-is-desperate-to-turn-old-blockbusters-into-new-franchises/?sh=508ded3012a9
Making new characters isn’t really happening, at least not when it comes to risky, big budget stuff. So, I don’t see how that suggestion is meant to quell calls for a race swapped Bond. People were saying “just make new characters” ten years ago. If we were going to get them we’d have them by now, but it hasn’t happened, because the studios don’t see originals as a viable option. IP is what sells now, even over starpower. Adapting the most obscure Marvel comic characters into that universe is a safer bet than an original film with most Hollywood A listers nowadays. And given how poor representation in media was for minorities until very recently, there’s unfortunately nowhere near as much pre-existing IP for Hollywood to adapt with minority characters. So, you’re going to get things like race swapped reboots, and characters who weren’t gay being made gay, and things like that. Inevitable. The world is growing more progressive as the studios become more and more risk adverse.
And again, we’re culpable in that, so we can’t complain. I missed Last Night in Soho at the cinema for example, which I’m sure I would’ve liked. Managed to catch Bond four times though, like the fanboy I am.
Not your IP though is it mate. It’s Barbara Broccoli’s, who’s said Bond can be any colour.
I know all too well about how long BP has journeyd to get to the big screen. Snipes wanted to do it and settled for Blade instead due to several issues and look at how Blade turned out. One of the most popular comic book IPs that essentially paved the way for the modern comic book movie post the genre killing and disaster movie tgat was Batman and Robin. I was following the birth of the MCU from the very start when rumours were swirling around with the deals Marvel was making with Meryl Lynch. Black Panther was a hot talking point from the start as the MCU was to focus on their lesser known IPs but Ike Purlmutter a known racist didn't want to make a film based on the character and this is even up until as recently as 2015 but fortunately he got ousted.
Says? Look at films like Inception and Tenet. Thats why I stressed the point of talent infrastructure and behind the camera. If you had film makers like Nolan, Scott (in the car if these 2, make MORE commercial films with black leads), Eastwood, Spielberg, Cameron and directors of a similar calibre investing their efforts into telling stories that feature a black lead we wouldn't be having this conversation. Jordan Peel makes horror films and the last couple he's done have done very well and featured a black lead. If the aforementioned bothered to do something similar with big budget action movies, you honestly think the studio won't greenlight it? Now who's being naieve?
No. It has nothing to do with originals not being a viable option. It has everything to do with the racial climate and not investing in more projects with black leads.
Only to an extent. If the film is shit then it doesn't matter. Look at how things turned out for that ghosbusters movie. Did the mighty brand name of the MCU help Eternals? No, it didn't. In fact Etetnals is the MCU's first rotten movie.
True but that doesn't make it right and it only reinforces my point that these original projects need these so called film makers who are all about the art of cinema to step up and lead the way. How many mob films does Scorcese need to make? He can bemoan MCU films not being real cinema but at least the MCU is creating opportunities and diversifying the brand of movies onto several sub genre movies. If these guys want to make a commercial film with a person of colourcas the lead, they'll eventually get the backing of whichever studio. They need to lead from the front instead of waxing the rhetoric of injustice and unfairness that they themselves are perpetuating.
And that's on you. If you like something put in the effort and make time. Everyone is busy but we create time, just like you did to see NTTD 4 times.
Nope andvit's not yours either, but at least my justification to keep the IP as close to how the creator intended it to be is more valid than you wanting a black Bond just because. As I said before, let's see a black Tarzan or a white Mowgli first before we start tinkering with Bond's skin colour. At the end of the day Babs can say whatever she likes but don't be surprised when you find out the next actor is some white guy who was probably an extra in one of the early Harry Potter films.
It’s on all of us, that’s what I’m saying. Audiences as a whole aren’t gravitating towards original content anymore. There were barely any screenings of Last Night in Soho, because nobody wanted to see it, so I gave up trying. I did manage to see The Last Duel, which was completely empty. Not sure why you suddenly went off on one about how diverse Marvel’s lineup is, but again, they’re all Marvel films. A known IP.
I never said I would be surprised if it’s another white guy, nor did I say it didn’t want it to be. You’re the only one arrogant enough to claim to know what she’s thinking. All I’ve said is that it’s possible, and that the “just make new characters” solution clearly isn’t going to happen, so it seems like a bit of a pointless talking point. It’d be great, but it’s not happening, so here we are.
And no your opinion isn’t more “valid”. You’re a geezer with an opinion, same as me.
There’s less investing in original IP in general, in Bond’s blockbuster area. Because it’s becoming less and less viable. We’re not gonna see a race swapped reboot of Taxi Driver are we? Franchise driven blockbuster climate + growing desire for more representation in all sorts of media = risk adverse studios race/gender/sexuality swapping rather than making new roles.
Does Aidan Turner count as he does look middle eastern in some photos
Seriously though if it happens I will still try and give it a shot and try and emulate bond in certain social situations.
Putting a bit too much info out there (but since no one knows what I look like here I guess it’s ok) I have poor social skills so since 2017 I have been watching a ton on breakdowns on what Bond does and why so I can be a bit better in social situations
Yeah I think that's a decent point. Is how he looks more important than how he acts? If his looks don't affect his behaviour (i.e he's still great-looking enough to pull all the birds) then does it matter?
That is kind of exactly the opposite meaning that the phrase 'apples and oranges' has though.