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 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.
I couldn't agree more.
However, if a minority is cast to satisfy some diversity quotient, then I will be quite upset.
Just purely on the basis of probability and based on the pool of qualified candidates for such a role, it's much more likely to be on account of the latter than the former, which would be a real shame imho.
But by that logic we wouldn't have got Casino Royale would we. Die Another Day did very well at the time. Changing Bond's race would be a risk but if the actor was the best choice for it then I'd want them to go for it.
I know for some people them not being white would automatically prevent them from being the best choice but I don't see it that way and I don't think EON do either. I think it's just a matter of time really, and I'm looking forward to the day it does happen because at least then the debate will be over.
Me too, I still wish he'd gotten a fifth film in 2004, but my point was that CR was a risk that paid off.
If there is a trend to cast minority actors in major franchises in the future, then perhaps EON will once again decide to follow the crowd. Otherwise, I can't see it happening. What I'm saying is Batman will probably have to go first again. Over to you Bruce.
I'd rather see Batman go first or even Superman. I'm so sick of seeing media articles advocating, say Gillian Anderson or Idris as Bond, I'd welcome the shift in focus to Superman.
I agree with you though that the SJW crowd should go after Supes. He represents all that's good and wholesome in superhero world, so I can imagine he would be the most fitting poster boy for diversity.
I suppose Superman has been tampered with in many ways, though. I never got into it, but Smallville's re-visionary idea of having no flights or tights turned out quite successful. It just wasn't Superman to me.
I get the impression it was aimed more for audiences who never particularly cared for Supes in the first place. Same with the newer Cavill Man of Steel.
Title of the movie:
PRIVATE DICK SHAFT
Not the same. Shaft doesn't have a history of recasts by actors who look and act completely different. Technically Shaft has never even been recast (Sam Jackson played the original's nephew). And Shaft is explicitly tied to his race while Bond nowadays isn't. Do you ever hear Bond referred to as white secret agent James Bond in the media? No. Shaft is called the black private dick in his own theme song. Bond's whiteness used to be synomynous with his identity because of his posh background. But I don't think it is anymore. British upper class secret agent doesn't have to mean white in 2018.
There really isn't an equivalent where the "how about a white xxx" example works imo. The only equivalent characters to Bond I can think of where there's been a precedent set for similarly drastic recasts are Batman and Doctor Who.
And to be honest I think a black Batman is actually much harder to justify. He's really rich from a famous old money family. That doesn't really work if slavery was legal just a few generations ago.
But for Bond his background isn't important to the character and even so, you could have a minority actor play the old Etonian side nowadays. If anything him not being white would add to what Vesper said in CR, about not being accepted in Eton because he didn't come from money, didn't fit the mold.
What does feminism have to do with it? And wouldn't Brosnan and Connery be celts rather than anglo-saxons?
I'm not an "SJW" who's out to destroy all your white heroes. I just don't see any reason why the modern Bond has to be white. Isn't what Fleming wrote? Okay but the films and actors have already strayed really far from Fleming to the point that some are unrecogniseable. The only real argument I can think of for him having to be white is that he always has been up to this point, which I don't think is a good argument for him to stay white because his appearance and personality change all the time.
I'm not saying he has to be black or asian or anything else either. I'm saying it doesn't matter either way to me and frankly I don't get why it's such a big deal to so many. I've read comments from some saying they'd stop watching the films. Stop watching the films we all love so much because the actor is a different colour. Moonraker, Brofeld and other deviations from Fleming are fine, as is the actor looking nothing like Fleming's Bond as long as he's still white, but changing Bond's skin colour is apparently the line. To me that's mental. Wouldn't have any more of an impact on his character than changing his hair colour imo.
White characters are seen as "defaults", so changing them to another ethnic image is okay by the SJW crowd. But, if vice versa happens, the outcry of "whitewashing" is to be heard loud and the filmmakers/authors/creators are to be demanded to be burned at the stake. Why not cast a white actor to play Shaft, hmm? Because his world is in the ghetto underworld and that only applies to black people? Do contradictors mean that a white person can't be a hero in the ghetto underworld? Isn't that racist? (I'm speaking hypothetically here, not exactly responding to a quote that refers to something you said.)
I'm not here to spew hate upon anybody because that's the last thing I would ever think of. These "unwritten rules" that are referred to above by other members is there to apply on properties you can't corrupt or pervert. When things are created as they are, it's hideously atrocious to change it just to please a few minority groups. Don't mess with a creation's outlines. Bond is... let me spell it... white straight alpha male working for the British government and the main canon is that Fleming retconned him to be of Scottish-Swiss descent despite considering himself as an Englishman. That's canon and don't change it.
Now, my apologies in advance if you take my comments in a rather offensive manner because I don't mean any offense to begin with. Some things however should not be tampered with because ultimately they will lose their image, template, presentation and place. Let's not do that.
In general I believe the best person should get the job, regardless of race, sex etc. I recognize that life isn't fair and minority groups have to be protected, otherwise the majority will always get their way. However, to me that implies they should be given due consideration in the selection process, and not that they should necessarily be selected from a pool in order to make some sort of fairness or political statement.
At the end of the day it's quite unlikely just from a probability perspective that the best candidate for the role of James Bond is going to be a minority actor, because by definition they are a minority (from the pool of possible candidates). Is it possible? Sure. As an example, if there was an actor with the charisma and capabilities of a young Denzel Washington in the pool I think many would be hard pressed not to select him. Elba should at least make the finals.
Regarding his Etonian background etc., as I said in an earlier post, I personally still just find it easier to believe that a white actor comes from such a background (even if in Bond's case he didn't really belong there). Part of that is because we have a 50 year history which frames my expectations (and films which I revisit often), and part of it is because there are certain characteristics about Bond (including his womanizing) which I can more readily associate on film with a white actor. In time could my perceptions change as the world changes? Of course, but not yet. As an example, thuggish brooding working class Daniel Craig with his ill fitting suits doesn't quite fit my perception of cinematic James Bond, and I'm still coming to terms with it. I'd rather we not deviate even further from a template for the time being.
The point about Batman being a more difficult fit, given he's from old money, is a valid one. However no such problems exist with Superman. Let him go first.
In the case of Bond, I don't want Jamie Bell because he's too short and I just don't think he looks the part. Can I be accused of some 'ism' as a result given today's sensibilities? Sure. Perhaps I am guilty of it. However, the character as I perceive him is not Jamie Bell. That doesn't mean he shouldn't have a chance to audition, if he meets other criteria for the role.
Exactly! If you asked Fleming whether Bond should be black or gay he would have laughed in your face. Who knows better than the creator himself?