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 wouldn't necessarily say that. The Aston Martin DB5 was purposely meant to be this 'supercar', filled to the brim with convenient gadgets (ie. there's a number plate that spins/is valid in all countries, which is complete nonsense). The gadgets in TB are similarly outlandish when you think about them (there's no way the mini breather could work, and the radioactive pill sounds questionable). Not sure how convincing the Disco Volante's 'hyper speed' function is (although that might just be the dodgy sped up footage).
The 60s films did a good job of making these seem real though, I agree (by the 70s Bond films we get things like magnetic watches/voice changing modulators, so there was definitely a shift towards the outlandish).
I know they were planning on adding a bomb drone to the Aston Martin chase in NTTD. I like the idea of a giant drone being a villain's get away vehicle though.
Ajay Chowdhury makes a very good point that I hope is true: “When Disney bought Lucasfilm there wasn’t a film for three years. Tons of work is being done, it’s just not sexy things like scripts.”
Reading between the lines, it sounds like EON and Amazon/MGM could be laying the groundwork for a wider market-presence. I take Broccoli at her word that TV or a streaming series is off the table, but there are other ways to reinvent/expand a franchise with Bond’s global reach.
It may seem antithetical for a period Bond film to have modern product tie-ins but other franchises like Star Wars, which is set in a galaxy far, far away, have product tie-ins and cross promotions for every film. We may not see every brand-name with the Bond license in a period Bond film but I don’t think we have to.
You kinda missed my point. When the films were released these real world gadgets, such as Little Nellie, that was real flying gyrocopter and the Volante, that was a real hydrofoil, got massive press coverage. they became what made Bond's world real. The Bell jet pack is in a different league of real from things like Moore's magnetic watch.
If rumors are true, the announcement should be about a week and a half out now.
Just had a video pop up on YouTube, "On set with Bond 25" I can't believe they were filming in Jamacia over 5 years ago. It's been half a decade since cameras rolled on a Bond film, wow. (:|
Why does Bond need to be black? I'm not calling for a black actor to be Bond. And it's not because I believe there are no great black actors capable of the playing the role. There are plenty. But why? Once Bond is back and black, how does the series benefit? Why not a gay Bond? Or trans? Or a woman? Or disabled? "People are saying" is a Trump tactic. Which voices in the media are calling for that change? And why?
Can Bond be black? Of course he can. The owners of the brand can do whatever they want with the character. But why?
Maybe our next Sherlock Holmes should be black. Or Jay Gatsby, Atticus Finch, Harry Potter, Hercule Poirot. Or maybe some well-known black characters could be white: Apollo Creed, John Shaft, Easy Rawlins.
Why? Why not?
I've said before and I'll say again. A black spy series with a Bond-like character would be something I'd be a fan of. The argument that films are hard to make, much less being successful, is weak. Tell that to the folks who make about 500 films each year. There is no shortage of recurring characters showing up in sequels: Equalizer, Creed, Beverly Hills Cop.
But then the DB5 was in NTTD with real gadgets.
Perhaps the question ought to be why does Bond need to be White? If the best actor is Black or Asian, then why not?
It's not the same. White people have long been over-represented in media, so a non-White actor being cast in a role originally conceived of as White or previously occupied by a White actor is an attempt to correct the balance. A White actor cast in a non-White role is simply a dominant group robbing an oppressed group of one of their comparatively few characters.
Also, for many Black and Asian characters, their race is an important part of their story, so changing them would be taking away from their character. Bond's race has never been relevant to his character or any of the stories (apart from maybe LALD). One of the benefits of coming from a privileged group; his race (or more specifically, his Whiteness) is never relevant.
Because he was written and then portrayed as such for over 70 years. There is absolutely no reason to have Bond another race.
This is coming from my perspective that Nomi being a black, female 007 caused zero issues with me.
Interesting point of view. Why arbitrarily change the race of a character as opposed to creating a new character for that particular race? Also, not sure that you are taking into account the racism and snobbery that is a part of Fleming's Bond character in the films and novels.
It's fair to say that the cinematic Bond in the 21st century is quite far away from this. You could also say sexism is a part of Bond's character going back to the books and early films, yet we're far removed from the days of Bond beating and forcing himself onto women. You probably wouldn't describe Craig's Bond as a feminist, but it would be quite jarring if he came out with something as absurdly misogynistic as "women are for recreation."
Then what is the character of Bond? Just a generic secret agent that woks for the British government? BTW sleeping with married women is not all that 21st century and is very recreational.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/film/james-bonds-cinematic-return-teased-33582858
Rumors.
No question that in the history of Western films, white actors have typically played the lions share of roles. In an effort to correct the imbalance, will casting a black or asian actor as Bond help mitigate the problem? Can't as much be achieved by casting more minority actors or writing blockbuster films starring minority actors. Or does casting a black Bond drive the point home?
And do you think in other filmmaking cultures, they grapple with the same issue: that they may not be casting enough minority actors?
@007HallY - A talented actor of any race, given the physical requirements, could play Bond. But that's not the point. The point is, should his race be changed? What in the 21st Century says Bond ought to undergo a racial conversion?
Race doesn't have to be a part of Bond's story. I was explaining why casting White actors as characters originally conceived as non-White is inappropriate (aside from taking away roles from non-White actors) because in many cases race is an essential part of that character's story.
That being said, there are avenues through which such a thing could be explored. There's the obvious irony of Bond occupying his position as a defender of England, despite being half-Scot/half-Swiss, who spent much of his early childhood in Europe, and seems to spend much of his off-duty time outside of England.
And of course we have this passage in MR about Bond not fitting in among the members at Blades: "Bond knew that there was something alien and un-English about himself. He knew that he was a difficult man to cover up. Particularly in England. He shrugged his shoulders. Abroad was what mattered."
Casting an actor of a different race could be an interesting way of developing this aspect of the character further, exploring his relationship to England, and what it means to be English.
Also, considering the character and his world were created in Jamaica, giving Bond some Jamaican ancestry feels quite appropriate.
But these are all just ideas. They could just as easily ignore the actor's race altogether.
I don't see how eliminating the character's racism and sexism (or simply toning down the latter) turns him into a generic secret agent.
Comments and rumors from fans. That will get you no where fast.
The Bond series itself is not without sin.
Though I am not in favor of casting Bond with a non-white actor, should that happen, my preference would be that Bond's race is ignored. While I would never suggest that oppression and discrimination are not common experiences among people of color, in some respects the angry young black man with a chip on his shoulders and a suitcase full of issues can rise to the level of stereotype and cliche. I would prefer this: Bond is black. So what? Let's get on with the action. Could Bond be motivated by issues other than race? Felix could be a model. Other than his own reference to "a brother," race is never an issue.
Wouldn’t it be simpler and easier just to create a new spy franchise with a new character played by a black actor instead.
Nice to see common sense prevails.
It’s interesting that your description of a “shot in the arm” means going back to what was done before as opposed to innovating something new or different. I agree with you that some of the dramatic storytelling in the Craig era didn't stick the landing. Drama becomes melodrama when subtext is erased. I think Blofeld being, in some ways, Bond's dark foil is an intersting dramatic thread that should have stayed tied to the subtext of Spectre's narrative, but I appluad EON for the effort.
I disagree with you on characterizations place in the narrative. It should be at the center. Characterization is the stream that feeds the story. One has to undersrand why Bond reacts in order to understand how he would react. I think the way Bond films were scripted in the past is in the past. Genre entertainment is far more sophisticated and nuanced today than it was even twenty years ago.
Audiences have different expectations of their entertainment--especially for theatrical releases. I don’t think the next era has to repeat the dramatic beats of the last era but going back nearly twenty-five years to retread a formula that was already being tinkered with in the Brosnan era will handicap, if not kill, the franchise.
In my opinion genre filmmaking has finally caught up with other story forms, in cinema and beyond. Of course, there have always been standouts in genre filmmaking but, on the whole, it was rudimentary in execution and shallow in depth. Things have changed. There’s still a lot of it that sucks but it adheres to the standards of now.
Exactly, the colour of one's skin is ultimately surface level, yet it's used by some as a reason why certain actors, who are otherwise very capable of embodying all the essential qualities of Bond, can't play the part.
And what would be wrong with a black Harry Potter?
I was thinking about the classic sci-fi novel Neuromancer, which helped popularise the cyberpunk genre. It's set in the near future and it's set in a gritty back-alley drug culture thriving in the shadow of big corporations that are as powerful as some governments. Many of the characters have cybernetic enhancements: our protagonist Case is a hacker who has a port in his skull to connect him directly to cyberspace; Molly, his minder, has retractable razorblades implanted in her fingers, mirrored lenses permanently fitted over her eyes, giving her night vision etc, and has had her reflexes augmented by technology. These things aren't far from a Bond film - certainly not from a Moore Bond film. I wonder if rather than having a Spectre crime syndicate, we should perhaps have an increasingly powerful legitimate corporation powerful enough to control small governments and influence large ones, perhaps with its own security/espionage force? We've had mad billionaires in Bond before, but I wonder if a less centralised company run by a shadowy board of directors might not be a more frightening idea? Just grey men, callous and distant from the 'common man', who only care about feathering their own nest.
With Bladerunner Ridley Scott put Cyberpunk up on the big screen, and I wonder given that Villeneuve directed its sequel, whether Eon are thinking of going for that mix of cyberfantasy anchored in a gritty real world setting? Certainly I think if I wanted to go in that direction Villeneuve would be my go-to guy.