No Time To Die: Production Diary

17817827847867872507

Comments

  • Posts: 12,526
    I agree that Trump is beyond parody, but so is this thread now! Lol!
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    How about getting away from political bombs on this topic.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited June 2017 Posts: 15,423
    Some people will deliberately start it and keep repeating the same post tastelessly. We've said it doesn't warrant it in this thread, but some user deliberately put the ignition behind it (again) and is now nowehere to appear.

    Who knows? Perhaps that user will appear again, name his favourite next Bond villain with an insult to the said preferred figure in the "role" and never properly contribute to the topic.
  • edited June 2017 Posts: 12,837
    bondjames wrote: »
    We live in a diverse society and it is vital both culturally and commercially that our industry reflects this in front of and behind the camera."

    Interesting.

    Well we have had Harris, Wright, Salmon & Dench in the recent Bond films, so we're doing alright there. Perhaps it's time for someone from an Indian or Chinese background to show up at MI6.

    I think this is an issue to be honest. Bond as a series has displayed a shocking lack of diversity and the producers attempts to address it seems to extend solely to making another of the recurring allies black.

    Bond really should be more diverse series than any other. He goes all over the world and yet almost always seems to find himself interacting with white Europeans, Brits and Americans. In fact the series sometimes goes out of the way to keep it that away: there's the exiled Afghan prince who's also a white Frenchman, or the time Bond went up against North Korea which of course coincided with a plot involving literal whitewashing.

    I know some will hate this post because I'm advocating diversity for the sake of it (funnily enough the whole "as long as there's a good story reason" line never comes up when casting a straight white role) but Bond should and could be setting a real example. With all the globe trotting the series does, it has no excuse not to be more diverse than it has been up to this point. Lets see the different cultures of these exotic locations past money shots of exotic landmarks and stereotypical locals. We've gotten away from outright racism (LALD, OP) and the Craig era has steered clear of whitewashing roles but the roles there still, for the most part, remain white. 24 films into this globe trotting franchise and there's been one film with a non white main villain. One. There's also been two films with a female main villain and even those are up for debate (FRWL and TWINE). Off the top of my head, there have been six non white Bond girls in the franchise (the YOLT girls, Rosie, Wai Lin, Jinx, Lupe).

    For a franchise that's lasted 50 years and has globe trotting as one of its selling points, it isn't good enough imo.

    Yawn.

    I don't see anyone whingeing that King Fu films always feature Chinese actors or the lack of opportunity in Bollywood for white actors from Tunbridge Wells but for some reason (yet to be explained to me) Bond would automatically be immeasurably better if all the cast came from different continents and half were women and the other half gay.

    You're could have Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman and Denzel Washington on the cast but if the script is by P&W it's still going to be rubbish.

    Hear hear. And who has ever PROVED diversity, in any respect other than cuisine and possibly music, is a good thing? Ultimately, the Left's full court press for diversity is a political ploy meant to eradicate the power of whites in the civilization they built, and to hand that power to people who, as often as not, are inimical to that civilization. To the extent that the Bond films become a multiculti slurry, they cease being genuine Bond.

    Correct me if I'm wrong because I just had to google the word "inimical", but you seem to be implying (taking that power "away from whites" and giving it to other "people", other races?) that because I'm not white I'm just as likely to be harmful to society as I am a productive member of it? Well at least you kept it 50/50, I seem to recall you telling me I was more likely to be violent and aggressive last time so that's a step up. And aside from food and music, different races and cultures shouldn't mix at all? Good to know. And you're American aren't you PK? I guess an argument could be made for your society having been built by whites, if you ignore the slave labour that was legal in your country for years.

    I'd complain but it won't do any good. You've made similar comments before about how the liberals (I think your exact words were "leftist gay mafia") are out to get you and take away your rights as a white man, as well as other racist statements including being pro apartheid, and there never seems to be any consequences. I even got reprimanded for daring to call you out for being racist, because you've been around since the old site and are matey with some of the mods.

    Just waiting now for a bolded comment about everyone getting back on topic. Because remember guys, double posts, duplicate threads and off topic threads aren't allowed but outright racism is cool if you've been a member for long enough.

    For those of you who were part of the discussion we were having over in the PC thread, this is partly what I was on about. People like Khan are why many people within minority groups find it hard to take a joke at their expense.
  • Posts: 1,031
    bondjames wrote: »
    We live in a diverse society and it is vital both culturally and commercially that our industry reflects this in front of and behind the camera."

    Interesting.

    Well we have had Harris, Wright, Salmon & Dench in the recent Bond films, so we're doing alright there. Perhaps it's time for someone from an Indian or Chinese background to show up at MI6.

    I think this is an issue to be honest. Bond as a series has displayed a shocking lack of diversity and the producers attempts to address it seems to extend solely to making another of the recurring allies black.

    Bond really should be more diverse series than any other. He goes all over the world and yet almost always seems to find himself interacting with white Europeans, Brits and Americans. In fact the series sometimes goes out of the way to keep it that away: there's the exiled Afghan prince who's also a white Frenchman, or the time Bond went up against North Korea which of course coincided with a plot involving literal whitewashing.

    I know some will hate this post because I'm advocating diversity for the sake of it (funnily enough the whole "as long as there's a good story reason" line never comes up when casting a straight white role) but Bond should and could be setting a real example. With all the globe trotting the series does, it has no excuse not to be more diverse than it has been up to this point. Lets see the different cultures of these exotic locations past money shots of exotic landmarks and stereotypical locals. We've gotten away from outright racism (LALD, OP) and the Craig era has steered clear of whitewashing roles but the roles there still, for the most part, remain white. 24 films into this globe trotting franchise and there's been one film with a non white main villain. One. There's also been two films with a female main villain and even those are up for debate (FRWL and TWINE). Off the top of my head, there have been six non white Bond girls in the franchise (the YOLT girls, Rosie, Wai Lin, Jinx, Lupe).

    For a franchise that's lasted 50 years and has globe trotting as one of its selling points, it isn't good enough imo.

    Yawn.

    I don't see anyone whingeing that King Fu films always feature Chinese actors or the lack of opportunity in Bollywood for white actors from Tunbridge Wells but for some reason (yet to be explained to me) Bond would automatically be immeasurably better if all the cast came from different continents and half were women and the other half gay.

    You're could have Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman and Denzel Washington on the cast but if the script is by P&W it's still going to be rubbish.

    Hear hear. And who has ever PROVED diversity, in any respect other than cuisine and possibly music, is a good thing? Ultimately, the Left's full court press for diversity is a political ploy meant to eradicate the power of whites in the civilization they built, and to hand that power to people who, as often as not, are inimical to that civilization. To the extent that the Bond films become a multiculti slurry, they cease being genuine Bond.

    Correct me if I'm wrong because I just had to google the word "inimical", but you seem to be implying (taking that power "away from whites" and giving it to other "people", other races?) that because I'm not white I'm just as likely to be harmful to society as I am a productive member of it? Well at least you kept it 50/50, I seem to recall you telling me I was more likely to be violent and aggressive last time so that's a step up. And aside from food and music, different races and cultures shouldn't mix at all? Good to know. And you're American aren't you PK? I guess an argument could be made for your society having been built by whites, if you ignore the slave labour that was legal in your country for years.

    I'd complain but it won't do any good. You've made similar comments before about how the liberals (I think your exact words were "leftist gay mafia") are out to get you and take away your rights as a white man, as well as other racist statements including being pro apartheid, and there never seems to be any consequences. I even got reprimanded for daring to call you out for being racist, because you've been around since the old site and are matey with some of the mods.

    Just waiting now for a bolded comment about everyone getting back on topic. Because remember guys, double posts, duplicate threads and off topic threads aren't allowed but outright racism is cool if you've been a member for long enough.

    For those of you who were part of the discussion we were having over in the PC thread, this is partly what I was on about. People like Khan are why many people within minority groups find it hard to take a joke at their expense.

    This thread is about Bond 25
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,591
    This has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I have a feeling this thread should be closed and a new one opened.
  • Posts: 12,837
    And there it is. I know it's off topic. But am I the only one taking issue with what's being said here????
    jake24 wrote: »
    This has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

    I appreciate the work you've put into this thread and I'm genuinely sorry for polluting it with all this. But this is something that comes up every now and again with Khan and it never seems to be addressed.
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I have a feeling this thread should be closed and a new one opened.

    Yeah that'll sort it until he says something similar in the future. But it's clear that nothing's going to be done at this point so forget it. Wish I hadn't bothered. I'll learn to keep my mouth shut and learn to accept being made to feel inferior based on my skin colour in the future if it doesn't relate to the topic at hand :)
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    I think it was a valid discussion, and on topic. We are discussing the role of diversity in the franchises future.
  • Posts: 19,339
    I think it was a valid discussion, and on topic. We are discussing the role of diversity in the franchises future.

    Oh don't get me wrong,i don't mean the conversation now ,I mean its just 794 pages of nothing really ;)
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    When you say the franchise should be an setting an example, an example of what? If Bond isn't good enough, what isn't it good enough at being? You say the franchise lacks diversity, but only if you choose to define "diversity" solely in terms of race, which seems to me to be quite an arbitrary metric.
    bondjames wrote: »
    We live in a diverse society and it is vital both culturally and commercially that our industry reflects this in front of and behind the camera."

    Interesting.

    Well we have had Harris, Wright, Salmon & Dench in the recent Bond films, so we're doing alright there. Perhaps it's time for someone from an Indian or Chinese background to show up at MI6.

    I think this is an issue to be honest. Bond as a series has displayed a shocking lack of diversity and the producers attempts to address it seems to extend solely to making another of the recurring allies black.

    Bond really should be more diverse series than any other. He goes all over the world and yet almost always seems to find himself interacting with white Europeans, Brits and Americans. In fact the series sometimes goes out of the way to keep it that away: there's the exiled Afghan prince who's also a white Frenchman, or the time Bond went up against North Korea which of course coincided with a plot involving literal whitewashing.

    I know some will hate this post because I'm advocating diversity for the sake of it (funnily enough the whole "as long as there's a good story reason" line never comes up when casting a straight white role) but Bond should and could be setting a real example. With all the globe trotting the series does, it has no excuse not to be more diverse than it has been up to this point. Lets see the different cultures of these exotic locations past money shots of exotic landmarks and stereotypical locals. We've gotten away from outright racism (LALD, OP) and the Craig era has steered clear of whitewashing roles but the roles there still, for the most part, remain white. 24 films into this globe trotting franchise and there's been one film with a non white main villain. One. There's also been two films with a female main villain and even those are up for debate (FRWL and TWINE). Off the top of my head, there have been six non white Bond girls in the franchise (the YOLT girls, Rosie, Wai Lin, Jinx, Lupe).

    For a franchise that's lasted 50 years and has globe trotting as one of its selling points, it isn't good enough imo.

    When you say the franchise should be an setting an example, an example of what? If Bond isn't good enough, what isn't it good enough at being? You say the franchise lacks diversity, but only if you choose to define "diversity" solely in terms of race, which seems to me to be quite an arbitrary metric.

    I'm saying Bond isn't good enough at representing different races, which wouldn't be an issue if the series didn't make a point of going to different countries all the time. It's actually fairly progressive in a lot of ways. Bond girls being one example, mostly strong female characters from the beginning, although more female villains would be a nice change. But what I find a bit troubling is how, when it comes to the main cast, Bond always finds himself surrounded by white faces no matter where in the world he is. To use a recent example: Severine, victim of the Macau sex trade but did they get an Asian actress to play her? Nah. A French actress will do. Or how about the time Bond was sent to India to investigate an unusually white Afghan prince. Or the time he was sent after a North Korean colonel who conviniently turned himself into a white man after the first fifteen minutes.

    I want Bond to set an example when it comes to being culturally and ethnically diverse because with all the globe trotting he does, it has the perfect platform to do so without it coming across as really forced. How about we actually get a sense of the different cultures of these places (some of the earlier films were better at this) instead of just moneyshots of the tourist locations, and have Bond actually interact with people from there? That'd be a nice start.

    I'm not saying that every film needs to be a melting pot for the sake of it but we've had one non white villain in a series of 24 films that goes all over the world, even when the scripts have called for one of a different ethnicity (Chinese? Lets cast a white guy. Afghan? That French guy suits the role). I can't be the only one who thinks that's an issue. If a large portion of Bond 25 for example is set in Japan than how about a Japanese Bond girl or a Japanese villain, or both? Don't think that's too much to ask for. More often than not the natives of the country Bond's visiting seem to be restricted to bit parts and supporting roles at best.

    Well Berenice Marloe is half Cambodian but I note you focus on the French half to make your dubious point?

    You seem to basing your entire case on Louis Jourdan 34 years ago. I'd love to know how EON casting directors were supposed to gain entry to Soviet occupied Afghanistan to cast an Afghan?

    Anyway time for a look at EON's crimes against diversity over the years:

    DN - Half Chinese/half German so equally valid for him to be played by a white actor as a Chinese actor. In any event this film was made 55 years ago where no one had heard of the concept of diversity and having an actor turn Chinese with the use of makeup was hardly scandalous.

    FRWL - The first shocking case of racism. The main villains are supposed to be Russian and Irish/German. But Klebb was played by an Austrian, Kronsteen by a Pole and Grant by an Englishman. At the height of the Cold War could they really not have flown to Moscow to cast some Russians? And surely menacing half Irish/half German people who can also act must be ten a penny?

    GF - More sickening racism. A British villain played by a German and a Korean henchman played by an Hawaiian (but this is OK because that is a minority so diversity box ticked).

    TB - Italian villain played by an Italian actor. Finally EON are getting it.

    YOLT - Half Polish/half Greek villain played by an Englishman. Oh dear. The film is set in Japan EON. Why couldnt you get a Japanese actor and make him look white with makeup? Or better still rewrite Fleming's character as a Jap? The fact that the rest of the cast was made up of Japanese actors too little too late.

    OHMSS - Greek American playing a Greek/Pole. Shame they couldnt make the effort to track down a Greek/Polish actor but I suppose its a step in the right direction. At least a German playing a German with Bunt but a pity they didnt just cast an African for the sake of it just to make things more interesting.

    DAF - Englishman playing a Greek/Pole this time. Will they ever learn? At least we have two yanks playing American villains but are Putter Smith and Bruce Glover actually gay? EON dropping the ball again by not casting Inman and Grayson.

    LALD - A Caribbean villain played by an American, but apparently this is fine because hes black.

    TMWTGG - A half Cuban played by an Englishman. I'm sure there were plenty of half Cuban applicants for the role if only EON cared about diversity in the slightest. Nick Nack a tricky case. The character has no biography so EON cycnially ticking a whole load of diversity boxes in one by casting a French/Filipino dwarf. But as the film is set in Thailand shouldnt they really have made the effort to find a Thai dwarf?

    TSWLM - With a name like Stromberg you'd assume he was Swedish but as they never tell us EON get away with casting a German. Jaws in the novelisation is Polish but predictably EON got an American to do it.

    MR - In the film its a bit unclear where Drax is from. Is he German masquerading as an Englishman as in the book? Is he French? Is he American? In any event EON finally getting @thelivingroyale's point and because most of the filming took place in France they cast a Frenchman and then followed it up by changing the character of Trudi Parker to Corinne Dufour so they could cast a French actress. Although of course we never actually set foot in France in the story so once again they've made a hash of it. Do they get any kudos for casting Chang as a random Japanese bloke. I guess it would have been better if we could have had a Venetian or Brazilian henchman because apparently its automatically better if the cast features people from the filming locations.

    FYEO - Kristatos, a Greek, played by an Englishman, Locque, a Belgian, played by an Englishman and Kriegler, an East German, played by an Englishman just shows EON's disgusting whitewashing system at work.

    OP - The nadir. An Afghan played by a Frenchman FFS. Sickening. Followed up by a Russian played by an Englishman and even Colonel Toro is played by an Englishman. EON tossing a few token parts to Indians but frankly its a disgrace. It wouldnt surprise me if they didnt even get German actors to play the 'Das ist mein auto' woman and the fat couple. You'd almost think EON just turned to a stock of jobbing actors in London who they hired to fill various small parts rather than incurring vast effort and cost by flying all over the world to cast bit parts authentically.

    AVTAK - Zorin born in Germany and lived in France but predictably played by an American. Its what I expect from racist EON frankly. May Day we never find out but its all OK because they cast a black woman so who cares even if May Day was supposed to be born in Finland?

    TLD - Koskov a Russian played by a Dutchman and Necros a Russian played by a German? EON just taking the piss now. At least they redeem themselves with Whitaker.

    LTK - Sanchez played by an Italian American. Presume EON didnt even bother trying to find any Isthmus actors to play the part. At least Del Toro is a Latino though.

    GE - Alec a Lienz Cossack who came to England at the age of 6. Did EON even make the most basic effort to hunt down any actors with that heritage? I dare say theres even a few Cossack actors brought to England aged 6 who had half their faces blown off if only EON bothered to look for them. Xenia, Boris and Ouromov all conforming to EON's anti diversity bias. The Soviet Union had collapsed by now so whats stopping them going to Russia and casting a load of Russians?

    TND - The film with the most dull and predictable of casting. A white Englishman and a white German as the main villains. People say TND is just a by the numbers Bond film and this is born out by its depressingly white villains. Even General Chang isnt played by a Chinaman.

    TWINE - Half Azerbaijani villain? Half Bosnian villain? Do you think EON who are making a commerical film bothered to find actors from these countries that no one had ever heard of rather than cast well known names like Sophie Marceau and Robert Carlyle? Its as if they dont even care about the Azerbaijani and Bosnian box office.

    DAD - The most racist plot we've yet seen. A Korean who changes his race not because he's a criminal who wants to disguise himself as a Western businessman but because EON dont care in the slightest about diversity. It goes without saying there are no North Koreans in the film and I hold EON entirely responsible for that given the ease of auditioning some genuine Pyongyang residents if they could only be bothered.

    CR - Albanian played by a Dane. We're already on familiar territory here. You might think this film is a step in the right direction with Sebastien Foucan, Isaach de Bankolé and Jeffrey Wright all being cast but two of those parts are terrorists which sends out the wrong message again.

    QOS - Frenchman played by a Frenchman so far so standard and a Bolivian played by a Mexican because clearly EON think all Latinos look the same.

    SF - Interesting case here. A 'British' agent given a Spanish backstory just because they wanted to cast Javier Bardem. Is it diversity when you have an agent working out of Hong Kong but cast a Spaniard? Even if you are getting A list talent? Surely a soap actor from Hong Kong would hit that diversity spot better than an Oscar winner ?

    SP - Here's a novel way of getting round the problem. Instead of trying to track down a half Greek/half Pole just change Fleming's character to someone from Austria and cast an Austrian. They could have made Denbeigh black but then that wouldnt be very good because hes a slimy Whitehall traitor and we all know that those kind of people are always white.

    When you look at it EON's record on diversity is about as good as the South African government of the early 80s.

    Consistent casting of Englishmen, consistent casting of the wrong nationality to play a character. Its as if they think an actor can just act and pretend to be someone else when we all know you need to have been born within 10 miles of where a character is from to play it convincingly.



    I blame the likes of Olivier for making the public think its OK for a Danish prince to be played by Englishman. And look at Day Lewis - three Oscars and each one for playing someone from a different country. Its endemic in the sordid profession of acting it seems.
    And there it is. I know it's off topic. But am I the only one taking issue with what's being said here????
    jake24 wrote: »
    This has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

    I appreciate the work you've put into this thread and I'm genuinely sorry for polluting it with all this. But this is something that comes up every now and again with Khan and it never seems to be addressed.
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I have a feeling this thread should be closed and a new one opened.

    Yeah that'll sort it until he says something similar in the future. But it's clear that nothing's going to be done at this point so forget it. Wish I hadn't bothered. I'll learn to keep my mouth shut and learn to accept being made to feel inferior based on my skin colour in the future if it doesn't relate to the topic at hand :)

    Although I find the 'diversity for the sake of it' comments tiresome I do agree with you here and would like to state that Khan's comments do not represent my views.
  • Posts: 12,837
    I can't really argue with a lot of that to be fair. I would say the DAD example is dubious though. Yeah they had to cast a white man as Graves but it was the script necessitating that in the first place that was the issue. And for the record I genuinely didn't know Berenice was mixed race.

    And don't worry, I know you're a lot more right wing than I am but that's cool and I'd never lump you in with the likes of Khan.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Bloody hell you lot are really bored with the lack of news arnt you ?!

    I hear Colin Salmon is going to be the next Bond.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Berenice was masterstroke casting. They'd have been hard pressed to find anyone that good in the role. So I forgive them.

    As I said earlier, I think they've done ok (I've travelled vicariously through Bond films and owe them a lot for introducing me to holiday spots and ethnicities that I wouldn't have considered otherwise), but they can do better and they will. That's the trend now anyway, and EON always follows trends these days.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    edited June 2017 Posts: 3,126
    Dennison wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    EON don't seem to be able to handle knocking out a Bond movie even every three or four years, so how on earth they'd cope with an expanded universe is anyone's guess.

    Frankly none of the other characters are inherently interesting enough to sustain a film anyway.

    I'm sure it's all tabloid BS tbh.

    Indeed, if Bond 25 were to come out late 2018 five Star Wars franchise films will have been released between Spectre and Bond 25.

    I've been hoping that gap between Spectre and Bond 25 is merely down to getting a new distributor. But as time goes on it suggests more to me a lack of direction, a lack of knowing where to go next, which falls in line with DC's peddling of 'we're all just tired' in other words, we have no imaginative ideas of where to go next. Maybe Bond should end, there are only so many ways you can keep on telling the same story. I think part of Skyfall's success was it was willing to be different - it was this aspect that caught the attention of my friends who maybe wouldn't venture out to the cinema to see a Bond film.

    Pardon? Just because they are incapable of producing movies - let alone good ones - on a regular basis doesn't mean the franchise has to end! James bond is such a unique figure in the spy/action/adventure genre that to my mind there are still countless stories to tell about him. Some of you are touting really frightening ideas!

    Bond 25 will be different trust me there is a big shake up just a gut feeling
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    bondjames wrote: »
    Berenice was masterstroke casting. They'd have been hard pressed to find anyone that good in the role. So I forgive them.

    As I said earlier, I think they've done ok (I've travelled vicariously through Bond films and owe them a lot for introducing me to holiday spots and ethnicities that I wouldn't have considered otherwise), but they can do better and they will. That's the trend now anyway, and EON always follows trends these days.

    I agree, Berenice saves that part of the film. Story wise, not much is happening, and although the character is interesting conceptually, her actually part as written is rather dull and underdeveloped. Her performance saves it.

    As for doing better with casting, my problem there is that it implies that there is some obvious threshold that they should be hitting, yet no one agrees if any such threshold exists, and if so where it lies. When I think of a diverse cast of characters, the last thing I come to is how their skin tones vary. That's irrelevant to me. To say that we have something specific to gain from intentionally including a actor from a given background, implies that they are bringing something to the table that they were born with. It's a more subtle way of stereotyping, IMO.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    What you guys think about this click the link or tap to see https://cafethinking.com/2016/01/07/bond-25-time-for-a-wrong-to-be-righted-forever/
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Berenice was masterstroke casting. They'd have been hard pressed to find anyone that good in the role. So I forgive them.

    As I said earlier, I think they've done ok (I've travelled vicariously through Bond films and owe them a lot for introducing me to holiday spots and ethnicities that I wouldn't have considered otherwise), but they can do better and they will. That's the trend now anyway, and EON always follows trends these days.

    I agree, Berenice saves that part of the film. Story wise, not much is happening, and although the character is interesting conceptually, her actually part as written is rather dull and underdeveloped. Her performance saves it.

    As for doing better with casting, my problem there is that it implies that there is some obvious threshold that they should be hitting, yet no one agrees if any such threshold exists, and if so where it lies. When I think of a diverse cast of characters, the last thing I come to is how their skin tones vary. That's irrelevant to me. To say that we have something specific to gain from intentionally including a actor from a given background, implies that they are bringing something to the table that they were born with. It's a more subtle way of stereotyping, IMO.
    Where they perhaps could do better with the casting is to actually cast more locals from the locations they are visiting in prominent roles. As an example, the Shanghai section of SF perhaps could have been expanded to include a more important role for a local actor. Similarly Morocco and Mexico (one line by Sigman doesn't count) in SP.

    I realize though that with the way they make the films these days, the locations are nothing more than cursory flashes, which is quite unfortunate. If they actually immerse themselves in one place (which many of us have advocated) again going forward, then there will be more appropriate opportunities for local talent to shine in key roles.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited June 2017 Posts: 9,117
    Yeah I can't complain too much about Berenice's casting really, she's probably my favourite Bond girl and I wish she'd had an even bigger role. I agree that I think they will do better in the future too. They seem to be constantly moving in the right direction.

    You keep saying this but its totally nebulous and I'm at a loss to know what is you want them to do? What is 'better'? Someone who is born in the filming location? Or someone is merely less white? Shouldnt the only thing they should be striving for that is 'better' when casting people is better actors? What is 'moving in the right direction'? Movement towards something implies that somewhere there a destination that is to be reached. I assume that end goal is more and more minorities until there are no white people in the cast at all?

    Here's a notion - how about EON ignore worrying about diversity tosh and concentrate on the bigger elephant in the room, namely finding someone 'better' at writing scripts?
    bondjames wrote: »
    Where they perhaps could do better with the casting is to actually cast more locals from the locations they are visiting in prominent roles. As an example, the Shanghai section of SF perhaps could have been expanded to include a more important role for a local actor. Similarly Morocco and Mexico (one line by Sigman doesn't count) in SP.

    What are you suggesting here? That the already bloated running time of SF be further extended by having an utterly pointless scene where Bond meets head of Station C China played by a Chinese actor who says something like, 'We have confirmed that Patrice will be landing at 1700hrs on KLM flight 235'? Ok its slightly better than the Sony Xperia advert scene that they have in the bar but is this all that diversity means? Just a token nod to some particular group with a line here and a line there and then get on with the story? Seems utterly patronising to everyone involved.
  • edited June 2017 Posts: 11,425
    I agree this is getting into absurd territory now.

    Although one of the nice things about Dr. No is that a lot of smaller parts in the cast are locals - amateurs or first time actors in many cases I think.

    The approach to diversity that is being advocated is missing the point of the report which Broccoli produced from what I can tell.

    Wish I hadn't mentioned it now. I only posted it because I thought it was interesting that she had time to chair/author a report on diversity and nepotism in the film industry that but is apparently too tired/bored to make a Bond film.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Where they perhaps could do better with the casting is to actually cast more locals from the locations they are visiting in prominent roles. As an example, the Shanghai section of SF perhaps could have been expanded to include a more important role for a local actor. Similarly Morocco and Mexico (one line by Sigman doesn't count) in SP.

    What are you suggesting here? That the already bloated running time of SF be further extended by having an utterly pointless scene where Bond meets head of Station C China played by a Chinese actor who says something like, 'We have confirmed that Patrice will be landing at 1700hrs on KLM flight 235'? Ok its slightly better than the Sony Xperia advert scene that they have in the bar but is this all that diversity means? Just a token nod to some particular group with a line here and a line there and then get on with the story? Seems utterly patronising to everyone involved.
    I'm suggesting that when a multi-$m production visits a foreign land for filming, it use the local talent where possible as prominently as possible. It would provide for a more authentic viewing experience.

    As I said, I realize it's not that easy to do given the way they film it these days (almost momentary flashes of landmarks). I would have expanded the Shanghai section of SF not for the sole purpose of adding a local actor (there were a few peeps in the casino after all, and let's not forget those two security guards who were killed by Patrice), but more because it was an interesting travelogue part of the film. Of course given SF's already bloated run time, this is probably unrealistic as you note.

    The 2nd part of my earlier post clarifies my position on this. I'd prefer no more cursory flash in the pan location visits. Rather, immerse in the spot one visits like in the old days, and then use the local talent where possible. Let the film breathe more in one place and let's get a feel for the locals & their culture. That way we get diversity and we also get a vicarious cultural experience, like in the old days.
  • Posts: 11,425
    If that's what you're saying then I probably agree. The earlier films do seem to have a much stronger sense of location, partly because you get the odd local actor bunged in for flavour. It does add authenticity. Hardly any films actually seem to do that anymore, so it would be novelty in many respects.



  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Yeah, I don't see any problem with that @bondjames.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited June 2017 Posts: 9,117
    bondjames wrote: »

    The 2nd part of my earlier post clarifies my position on this. I'd prefer no more cursory flash in the pan location visits. Rather, immerse in the spot one visits like in the old days, and then use the local talent where possible. Let the film breathe more in one place and let's get a feel for the locals & their culture. That way we get diversity and we also get a vicarious cultural experience, like in the old days.

    Perfectly fine and you wont get any argument from me on that score. But the problem (with SF in particular) is that they were skint and hence the Shangai location filming was limited to a few establishing shots.

    But I dont see it as a diversity issue, more an 'I want to see Bond films authentically on location like they used to' issue.
    Getafix wrote: »
    If that's what you're saying then I probably agree. The earlier films do seem to have a much stronger sense of location, partly because you get the odd local actor bunged in for flavour. It does add authenticity. Hardly any films actually seem to do that anymore, so it would be novelty in many respects.

    Fully agreed. DN nails it from the off and possibly has never been bettered. Filmed extensively on location and with colourful locals like Quarrel (although John Kitzmiller was an American who worked exclusively in Europe. Is the diversity box ticked here just because he is black? I dont really see how theres any difference between a black American playing a Jamaican and a white Frenchman playing an Afghan as long as they both look the part?) and Pussfeller and the 'Jump Up Jamaica' band (did they write the song or was that Monty by the way? The more you look at it the more 'diversity' becomes such an elusive concept).

    Along with DN FRWL, TB, YOLT, OHMSS, TMWTGG and OP all do a good job with their primary location. The key seems to be spending a solid hour at least of screentime in a location allowing time to build up atmosphere rather than flitting around every 20 mins.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »

    The 2nd part of my earlier post clarifies my position on this. I'd prefer no more cursory flash in the pan location visits. Rather, immerse in the spot one visits like in the old days, and then use the local talent where possible. Let the film breathe more in one place and let's get a feel for the locals & their culture. That way we get diversity and we also get a vicarious cultural experience, like in the old days.

    Perfectly fine and you wont get any argument from me on that score. But the problem (with SF in particular) is that they were skint and hence the Shangai location filming was limited to a few establishing shots.

    But I dont see it as a diversity issue, more an 'I want to see Bond films authentically on location like they use to' issue.
    Fair points and I agree but the two go hand in hand because there is more opportunity for local talent to shine if they spend time in one place.

    Ultimately, it's a shame the Bond films don't give me that palpable immersive holiday experience that they used to, despite all the jet setting about they seem to do these days. I'm less inclined to make note of a location they're in (for a possible future visit) these days, unlike in the past.
  • barryt007 wrote: »
    I think it was a valid discussion, and on topic. We are discussing the role of diversity in the franchises future.

    Oh don't get me wrong,i don't mean the conversation now ,I mean its just 794 pages of nothing really ;)

    Hey, nothing can be cool. It's the Seinfeld of MI6 threads. Bum-buh-dum-bum-bum. ;)
    bondjames wrote: »
    Berenice was masterstroke casting. They'd have been hard pressed to find anyone that good in the role. So I forgive them.

    From a performance standpoint, Berenice's casting was indeed a masterstroke.

    I haven't been following everything here—so much of this thread is ti;dr (too irrelevant, didn't read)—so this may have been mentioned already, but they were originally looking at Asian actresses for the role. Before the film came out, Mendes made some comment regarding how they needed the character to be able to read European in some scenes and Asian in others. Because distribution in China was such a big concern at the time, I suspect they wanted Severine to look more Asian during the casino scene where she is portrayed more or less favorably, and less Asian during the scene where she is beaten, bound, and humiliatingly and quite disturbingly shot in the head. In fact, when you watch the film, Severine does look more Asian during the casino scene and far less so on Silva's island. At the end of the day, it seems a Eurasian actress was the perfect solution to their problem. And Berenice was indeed the perfect actress for the role. (Really she should have been spent on a much better role, but that's another discussion entirely.)
  • Posts: 1,162
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I think it was a valid discussion, and on topic. We are discussing the role of diversity in the franchises future.

    Oh don't get me wrong,i don't mean the conversation now ,I mean its just 794 pages of nothing really ;)

    Hey, nothing can be cool. It's the Seinfeld of MI6 threads. Bum-buh-dum-bum-bum. ;)
    bondjames wrote: »
    Berenice was masterstroke casting. They'd have been hard pressed to find anyone that good in the role. So I forgive them.

    From a performance standpoint, Berenice's casting was indeed a masterstroke.
    .)

    The fact alone that she was only used for a mere 10 minutes proves that Mendes actually knows zilch about Bond movies (and honestly not about movies in general). And yes I know SF made a ton of money, but I would argue that just about any Bond film that has M dying and 007 crying would have made a good cut above the usual average at the box office.
  • Yes, you would think once they discovered what a brilliant actress Berenice was the creative team might have said to themselves, how can we better use her? What do we really gain by killing her character off here? Anything? We don't? Okay, maybe we should write her into the third act, she's obviously one of the better things the film has going for it.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Yeah I can't complain too much about Berenice's casting really, she's probably my favourite Bond girl and I wish she'd had an even bigger role. I agree that I think they will do better in the future too. They seem to be constantly moving in the right direction.

    You keep saying this but its totally nebulous and I'm at a loss to know what is you want them to do? What is 'better'? Someone who is born in the filming location? Or someone is merely less white? Shouldnt the only thing they should be striving for that is 'better' when casting people is better actors? What is 'moving in the right direction'? Movement towards something implies that somewhere there a destination that is to be reached. I assume that end goal is more and more minorities until there are no white people in the cast at all?

    Here's a notion - how about EON ignore worrying about diversity tosh and concentrate on the bigger elephant in the room, namely finding someone 'better' at writing scripts?

    By getting better I just mean more diverse casts in general. So more locals getting roles in the film as well as more actors of different ethnicities getting prominent roles in general. I'm not saying it should be their main focus but I think it'd be nice to see and it's something they seem to have been keeping in mind more and more from 1995 onwards.

    I wouldn't say there's a particular end goal really, it's not a case of having x amount of black actors and x amount of asian actors featured by Bond 30, so maybe my wording was off there. I just meant it's something they seem to have been keeping in mind more lately.
Sign In or Register to comment.