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
Perhaps Black Panther may change that, if it gets box office traction. Let's see.
It's much more difficult for an actor from a minority group to 'break out' certainly, but when they do, they are usually exceptional or above average as a result.
I haven't seen McMafia but I'm quite gratified that Hiddleston was the lead in The Night Manager. I wouldn't change that for the world. Neither of these two actors are typecast (yet). Rather, they appear to be stretching their wings and getting exposure. That's what every actor should strive for, but of course it will be more difficult for someone from a minority background. Such is life.
I mean picture what fleming would say if he watched goldeneye.
But it's a "fictional" character. James Bond isn't real.
Regardless whether he has traditionally been played by white people. I mean, I saw a production of Hamlet where the actor was black.
Daniel Craig, Timothy Dalton and Roger Moore do not lookalike. Yet they played the same character. One of the big things they have in common is the colour of their skin. Are we saying that being white is a minimum requirement for being considered as Bond?
I think audiences are sophisticated enough to appreciate that different actors with different faces can play the same part. If they can get over Roger Moore miraculously looking like Timothy Dalton, then surely they can get over Daniel Craig turning into a black man.
But I should underscore my point, more ethnic talent should be considered for roles that historically go to white people, especially in Britain. I feel there is a lot of great talent going unnurtured here.
The movie business is notoriously competitive, and studios go for what has worked and what makes money (why do we think that a significantly 'older' looking Craig is reportedly back for B25?). Will Smith was a big moneymaker for studios in the past and he got great roles as a result. When his star waned, the roles dried up. The same goes for Eddie Murphy and Wesley Snipes. So ultimately it comes down to putting butts in seats and being able to guarantee that.
RE: Bond - he was imagined as a white character by his author. I personally believe that's how he should remain, but that shouldn't stop black actors auditioning for the part. If someone is off the charts, then he should be given serious consideration.
It always has been.
Correct, but some news outlets still managed to turn it into a clickbait headline and then ran with it.
I'm afraid this will happen every couple of weeks now until actor nr. (00)7 is finally confirmed
This would be a fine argument if all we'd gotten for the last 50 years was a pure undiluted take on Fleming's character. As it stands film Bond is pretty much its own thing. Why is changing Bond's race a step too far but not his whole personality or the tone/content of the stories he's in? Fleming didn't even like Sean Connery at first.
For me changing his skin colour is at this point no different to changing his hair colour. I'm not saying doing it for the sake of it (although I do kind of hope it happens soon just so it's out of the way and we can all stop arguing and learn to live with it), but I don't see why minority actors shouldn't be allowed to audition. If we were still in the 1960s it wouldn't work but there's nothing about the modern James Bond that suggests he has to be white.
Because whiteness is no longer synonymous with Britishness, and the core attributes of Bond's identity are maleness and Britishness. The more considerable objection to having a non-white Bond is that the filmmakers would be less able to stress his Scottish/Swiss ancestry, since those nations are less diverse than England. But on the other hand, Bond was continually referred to as English in every Bond novel up to On Her Majesty's Secret Service. So even in Fleming's books Bond's identity was up for revision.
So a gay Bond is no problem then, as long as he is male and British?
Everybody needs a Hobby.
Very well said. It's not like the Scottish/Swiss thing has ever even mattered. It was a throwaway line in the YOLT obituary which, as you mentioned, was a bit of a retcon itself.
I'd say that his sexuality is another core trait that @Revelator forgot to mention. Changing his race nowadays is just changing his appearance again. Wouldn't be a fundamental change like his nationality or sexuality.
Since when? This news is too much, I need to have a sit down.
As far as I care, Hamlet could be played by a muppet.
It's more of an unwritten rule, really. Everyone knows that Bond is white, it doesn't really need to be said.
I hope his last words will be better than "Carrot juice, carrot juice, carrot juice".
Ethnic, you mean black, right? I mean, the press have a raging hard on for the first black Bond, and only black Bond. How come this diversity push begins and end with black actors?
It's only an "unwritten rule" because it hasn't happened yet. There's no reason the modern James Bond couldn't be played by a non white actor. Him being white isn't an important part of the identity of the character in 2018. A black guy chilling at Blades in the 1950s/60s? Pretty silly. But nowadays it would really just be changing his appearance, something they've done many times before. If Daniel Craig was black or brown it wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference to his movies. The only hurdle is the Scottish/Swiss background but really, who cares about that? We're fine with them butchering most of the books, turning the man himself into a quip spewing playboy, sending him off into space and making his arch enemy his long lost foster brother, but that little line from YOLT about his mum being Swiss and his dad being Scottish (which kind of goes against how he's portrayed as distinctly English early on anyway) is one bit of Fleming that's sacred?
I think what it comes down to is a lot of white people don't want to lose a white hero. Which is a perfectly valid reason, but I wish people would be more open about that instead of pretending to care about what Fleming would have wanted and all the rest of it. Because lets be honest, how many actual Fleming purists are there on here? We all love most of the films and can accept all the Bond actors so far, with their drastically different looks and versions of the character (you could even make a case for Craig and Dalton being very far from Fleming in a lot of ways) in stories that frequently stray ridiculously far from the source material (MR anyone?), but for some reason changing his skin color is a step too far?
Basically, Bond should be white because that's how Fleming wrote him? Fair enough, but by that logic you should hate most of the film series so far.
I've always said I'm against them doing it for the sake of it, but part of me does hope the next actor isn't white. Because I'm sure it'll happen eventually, and at least then it'll be out the way with and we can all stop arguing and live with it (or abandon the series in the case of some people, apparently).
Unfortunately, I think this is really the key point at hand here.
However, I believe that despite Bond's creator being a deeply conservative bloke and the fan-base generally being traditionalists; Bond fans are generally an accepting and considerate bunch. They've (mostly) accepted a female M and a black Moneypenny and Leiter.
If there was ever a non-white actor cast and a huge Ghostbusters-esque backlash, it wouldn't come from the fan-base on these type of forums.
While there is no logical reason why a non-white actor couldn't play this part, I personally find that it is most credible and easy to appreciate if these attributes and characteristics are portrayed by a white actor. Some of that may be due to familiarity with the way it has been done for 50+ years in my favourite franchise, and some of it may be due to my own preconceived notions. I'm not sure.
I realize that EON seems intent to change the character with the times so anything is possible in the future. In all honesty I still see the Daniel Craig reboot gritty short action man grim portrayal as a one off, and hope that they get back to a more traditional template once he's gone. I guess what I'm saying is that ultimately I'd prefer if they keep him white and try to take him back to the refined character that I've known and grown up with, even if that is increasingly an anomaly in today's day and age. It's like comfort food for me, even if it doesn't reflect today's Britain.
Traditional does not mean hateful.
In many ways, you are right in this respect.
However, to my knowledge, there is not a long history of recasting the part of Shaft. The Bond role is recast approximately every 10 years. It's become part of the cultural dialogue of "who will be the next James Bond", much like the casting of Doctor Who. Furthermore, each of the actors who have played the role have mostly looked different and bought different interpretations to the part. There is a lot of established room to reinterpret the Bond character. For example, there is light and day between Craig and Moore's respective turns.
In any regard, @talos7 your brining up of Shaft as a reference point is very telling. The first black character you can think of that is entrenched in our cultural purview is someone who was big in the 1970s and had an aborted attempt at a reboot 17 years ago.
This somewhat cements my point further; there just hasn't been enough roles for very capable non-white actors in big-tentpole Hollywood ventures. I hope Black Panther represents a sea-change this year (the trailers of which look very 007-inspired)
Agreed. As Blofeld would say. "Finish it."
I’m afraid not for me. I love what fleming wrote down, I don’t think M should be a woman, and I definitely don’t think Bond should be anything but a straight white male. I don’t give a shit about losing a white hero, I’m not white myself, but I love the character and don’t want to see it butchered. Continuing on, I’m not much of a fan of Daniel Craig as bond. He’s had two really amazing films and he’s a good actor but he isn’t really bond enough. Also you have to look at the reason they want a black bond. It’s not because Elba is particularly bond like but really it’s just affirmative action. Why make bond a woman?- it’s just affirmative action. Why make bond gay- same answer. So that’s a shitty reason.
I think the difference with Shaft as well is, he's tied to his race in a way Bond isn't. Shaft is the black private dick. Bond is the British secret agent. @bondjames makes a good point about the old Etonian aspect but I think as time has gone on and values have changed, it's become more and more credible that a non white actor could play it, to the point that nowadays there's really nothing about Bond that ties him to his race.
If you're a Fleming purist then fair enough, I can respect that (although I do think that changing his race wouldn't be a fundamental change like his sexuality and gender). I just find it funny when some members who aren't purists like yourself pull the "Fleming wrote Bond as a white man" card but then go on to praise films and actors that were nothing like what Fleming wrote.