Who should/could be a Bond actor?

18558568588608611179

Comments

  • edited December 2021 Posts: 12,837
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Ancillary characters don't carry the same weight the lead character of a 70 year old IP. Bond isn't going to be anything but white. Mark my words.

    Also, the comparison to Barbara dismissing Bond as a woman isn't the same as her outright saying Bond is and will forever be a white man. The 2 aren't remotely the same. You're comparing apples to otanges.

    Are you able to express why they're different? They seem extremely similar, and her different answers are rather striking.

    James Bond is a man, the whole world knows this, just like the whole world knows Mickey mouse is a mouse and not a giraffe. Making James Bond a woman is just a stupid idea and is an infinitely worse notion than changing Bond's ethnicity. Fortunately the world isn't too far gone for there to be outrage to keep a man what he is. It's a far easier and cleaner dismissal of Bond being a woman than it is to say, "Folks, we the producers hereby are thrilled to let you all know that James Bond will never be a person of colour. Stick that up your dojo and we look forward to seeing you in cinemas. Thanks, bye".
    However, with ethnicity there's more flexibility and hypothetical components to toy around with as a possibility that'll keep the Bond chatter perpetually going but it doesn't mean it'll actually happen.

    Yes I agree, there is indeed flexibility in his race and a possibility it will happen then. That's all we've been saying, glad you understand.

    Plot twist, ethnicity doesn't equal race.

    That’s not relevant to the post you quoted.
    And it is indeed what Ms Broccoli said, as I and others have pointed out, so why you think that’s some kind of killing blow to point that out is beyond me.

    They are not the same. That is all.
    mtm wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    I don’t see what the big deal is about a POC Bond. Just about every person I’ve spoken to about it is on board with the idea. As long as he’s British, handsome, charming, suave, convincing as a cold blooded killer, etc. there’ll be no complaints. I think it’s a fairly small subset of the overall audience that is opposed to the idea and if the actor gives a good performance they’ll come around. Obviously there’ll always be those who will never accept it no matter how good the portrayal is, but who really cares about what they think?


    Let's face it: A lot of hardcore Bond fans are extremely conservative. This is mainly where the dissent comes from. The general audience is more than open for a black Bond.

    Yeah I think you're right: and that makes sense really- fans are only fans because they liked the way it used to be. That's not a criticism, it's just the nature of fandom. So a larger subset of fans will be opposed to change than the general audience are.

    The general audience isn't black and white about it. Pun intended. A lot do care and a lot don't. Wouldn't be surprised if it's about the same in % as on here.

    I’m fine if they change it up and fine if they stick with white guys, but if they do change his race, then I think it’ll much more popular an idea than it is on here. I’m sure there’d be a backlash, but the discourse around this sort of thing is always mostly in online spheres. Most people probably don’t even know Bond was based on a book series, nevermind caring about how faithful it is. I think the vast majority just want to see a good film, and even most of those who will swear to “never watch Bond again” would probably see it out of curiosity (look at when they turned Doctor Who into a woman, a lot of moaning online, but then it got the biggest ratings it’d seen for years).

    Might lose them a few Daily Mail readers, but the publicity it’d grab, and the potential of using that publicity to win over the younger demographic Bond has been struggling with, would outweigh the risk of that imo. I think it could be good for the success of the series, providing the film was good (again to use Doctor Who as an example, almost all those new viewers then stopped watching it again because it was dire).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Ancillary characters don't carry the same weight the lead character of a 70 year old IP. Bond isn't going to be anything but white. Mark my words.

    Also, the comparison to Barbara dismissing Bond as a woman isn't the same as her outright saying Bond is and will forever be a white man. The 2 aren't remotely the same. You're comparing apples to otanges.

    Are you able to express why they're different? They seem extremely similar, and her different answers are rather striking.

    James Bond is a man, the whole world knows this, just like the whole world knows Mickey mouse is a mouse and not a giraffe. Making James Bond a woman is just a stupid idea and is an infinitely worse notion than changing Bond's ethnicity. Fortunately the world isn't too far gone for there to be outrage to keep a man what he is. It's a far easier and cleaner dismissal of Bond being a woman than it is to say, "Folks, we the producers hereby are thrilled to let you all know that James Bond will never be a person of colour. Stick that up your dojo and we look forward to seeing you in cinemas. Thanks, bye".
    However, with ethnicity there's more flexibility and hypothetical components to toy around with as a possibility that'll keep the Bond chatter perpetually going but it doesn't mean it'll actually happen.

    Yes I agree, there is indeed flexibility in his race and a possibility it will happen then. That's all we've been saying, glad you understand.

    Plot twist, ethnicity doesn't equal race.

    That’s not relevant to the post you quoted.
    And it is indeed what Ms Broccoli said, as I and others have pointed out, so why you think that’s some kind of killing blow to point that out is beyond me.

    They are not the same. That is all.

    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.
    mtm wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    I don’t see what the big deal is about a POC Bond. Just about every person I’ve spoken to about it is on board with the idea. As long as he’s British, handsome, charming, suave, convincing as a cold blooded killer, etc. there’ll be no complaints. I think it’s a fairly small subset of the overall audience that is opposed to the idea and if the actor gives a good performance they’ll come around. Obviously there’ll always be those who will never accept it no matter how good the portrayal is, but who really cares about what they think?


    Let's face it: A lot of hardcore Bond fans are extremely conservative. This is mainly where the dissent comes from. The general audience is more than open for a black Bond.

    Yeah I think you're right: and that makes sense really- fans are only fans because they liked the way it used to be. That's not a criticism, it's just the nature of fandom. So a larger subset of fans will be opposed to change than the general audience are.

    The general audience isn't black and white about it. Pun intended. A lot do care and a lot don't. Wouldn't be surprised if it's about the same in % as on here.

    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.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2021 Posts: 2,898
    Plot twist, ethnicity doesn't equal race.
    True. English, Scottish, Welsh - all British, all the same race, but different ethnic groups. So BB's comment that Bond can be any British 'ethnicity' isn't a reference to race, it's saying the actor can be English, Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Technically, anyway. But we know what she really meant - because who speaks in strict technical terminology all the time? She says 'franchise' when she means 'series', after all! ;)
  • My number 1 choice: Jack Lowden

    Jack-Lowden.jpg
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    My number 1 choice: Jack Lowden

    Jack-Lowden.jpg

    Absolutely, he’s very high on my lists of potential Bonds

    zWon4kS.jpg


  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited December 2021 Posts: 13,882
    I really wouldn’t use Doctor Who as any kind of ‘how to’. People were told that if they didn’t like it, then don’t watch it. They certainly did that. Even the defence of looking at the consolodated figures, instead of the overnight figures, doesn’t hold up. They might have lost Daily Mail readers, but at least they earned Twitter followers....

    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.
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 12,837
    I really wouldn’t use Doctor Who as any kind of ‘how to’. People were told that if they didn’t like it, then don’t watch it. They certainly did that. Even the defence of looking at the consolodated figures, instead of the overnight figures, doesn’t hold up.

    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.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited December 2021 Posts: 1,318
    I really wouldn’t use Doctor Who as any kind of ‘how to’. People were told that if they didn’t like it, then don’t watch it. They certainly did that. Even the defence of looking at the consolodated figures, instead of the overnight figures, doesn’t hold up. They might have lost Daily Mail readers, but at least they earned Twitter followers....

    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.

    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.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    I really wouldn’t use Doctor Who as any kind of ‘how to’. People were told that if they didn’t like it, then don’t watch it. They certainly did that. Even the defence of looking at the consolodated figures, instead of the overnight figures, doesn’t hold up. They might have lost Daily Mail readers, but at least they earned Twitter followers....

    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.

    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.

  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,814
    I have no idea who is going to be the next James Bond. None.
    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.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2021 Posts: 14,861
    Venutius wrote: »
    Plot twist, ethnicity doesn't equal race.
    True. English, Scottish, Welsh - all British, all the same race, but different ethnic groups. So BB's comment that Bond can be any British 'ethnicity' isn't a reference to race, it's saying the actor can be English, Scots, Welsh or Northern Irish. Technically, anyway. But we know what she really meant - because who speaks in strict technical terminology all the time? She says 'franchise' when she means 'series', after all! ;)

    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 really wouldn’t use Doctor Who as any kind of ‘how to’. People were told that if they didn’t like it, then don’t watch it. They certainly did that. Even the defence of looking at the consolodated figures, instead of the overnight figures, doesn’t hold up. They might have lost Daily Mail readers, but at least they earned Twitter followers....

    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.

    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.

    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 :)
  • 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.

    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.
    The question remains dear @MajorDSmythe , for what reason? That's the sensitive point for both the yay and nay sides.

    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.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2021 Posts: 2,898
    mtm wrote: »
    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.
    Yes, the govt's made a bad fudge of it all by linking race and ethnicity, even though they're different things. This whole thing's a quagmire and none of it's worth the argument or energy because it won't influence EON's decision in the slightest. Craig's casting shows that BB will do whatever she wants, no matter how it looks to pro- or anti- factions, what others think, what the media thinks or what the potential fallout might be. If CR hadn't been as great as it was, the financial consequences and the hit to the series of that move could've been pretty damaging - she must've known all that but did it anyway. She will again.
  • I really wouldn’t use Doctor Who as any kind of ‘how to’. People were told that if they didn’t like it, then don’t watch it. They certainly did that. Even the defence of looking at the consolodated figures, instead of the overnight figures, doesn’t hold up. They might have lost Daily Mail readers, but at least they earned Twitter followers....

    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.

    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.

    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.
  • They should keep Bond as close to Fleming's description as possible, as long as it says 'Ian Fleming's James Bond' at the start of the movie.
    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.
  • Also, this notion of making films with new characters of colour does work. Post Fast 5 and the death of Paul Walker those films make around a $Billion but it's taken time and they've put in the work to establish themselves.
    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.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    Venutius wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    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.
    Yes, the govt's made a bad fudge of it all by linking race and ethnicity, even though they're different things. This whole thing's a quagmire and none of it's worth the argument or energy because it won't influence EON's decision in the slightest. Craig's casting shows that BB will do whatever she wants, no matter how it looks to pro- or anti- factions, what others think, what the media thinks or what the potential fallout might be. If CR hadn't been as great as it was, the financial consequences and the hit to the series of that move could've been pretty damaging - she must've known all that but did it anyway. She will again.

    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.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2021 Posts: 14,861
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    I really wouldn’t use Doctor Who as any kind of ‘how to’. People were told that if they didn’t like it, then don’t watch it. They certainly did that. Even the defence of looking at the consolodated figures, instead of the overnight figures, doesn’t hold up. They might have lost Daily Mail readers, but at least they earned Twitter followers....

    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.

    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.

    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.

    But you said:
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Also, the comparison to Barbara dismissing Bond as a woman isn't the same as her outright saying Bond is and will forever be a white man. The 2 aren't remotely the same. You're comparing apples to otanges.

    They're apples to otanges, except when the same logic applies :D
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,898
    mtm wrote: »
    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.
    Yes, they were certainly confident that Craig would make a great Bond. I actually wasn't - I already knew who he was from several tv things and Layer Cake and I thought he was a genuinely great actor, even then - but I couldn't see him as Bond at all. I thought Bond had to look like Connery, Lazenby, Dalton or Brosnan. I looked at photos of Adrian Paul and thought that someone who looked like that was bound to replace Brosnan, even if he wasn't much of an actor. Craig was a better actor than any of them, but was he right for the part? I really didn't know, so I waited to see the results and...not only was CR brilliant, Craig himself was brilliant. Redefined it in one go. Definitely the right man for the job. You're right - BB knew. She'd been set on Craig for years by that point and was as confident in her choice as she was determined to get him. Will she be as certain this time? Dunno.

  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,882
    I really wouldn’t use Doctor Who as any kind of ‘how to’. People were told that if they didn’t like it, then don’t watch it. They certainly did that. Even the defence of looking at the consolodated figures, instead of the overnight figures, doesn’t hold up. They might have lost Daily Mail readers, but at least they earned Twitter followers....

    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.

    The question remains dear @MajorDSmythe , for what reason? That's the sensitive point for both the yay and nay sides.

    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.
    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.

    You'd think that creating more roles for non-white actors would be a good thing.
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 12,837
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Also, this notion of making films with new characters of colour does work. Post Fast 5 and the death of Paul Walker those films make around a $Billion but it's taken time and they've put in the work to establish themselves.
    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.

    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.
    They should keep Bond as close to Fleming's description as possible, as long as it says 'Ian Fleming's James Bond' at the start of the movie.

    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?
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 573
    Well, doesn't an established IP have to come from somewhere at its roots? You could argue Black Panther had a harder time because he debuted in comics in 1966. All IP and characters have to start somewhere...
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 12,837
    00Heaven wrote: »
    Well, doesn't an established IP have to come from somewhere at its roots? You could argue Black Panther had a harder time because he debuted in comics in 1966. All IP and characters have to start somewhere...

    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.
  • Posts: 207
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    My number 1 choice: Jack Lowden

    Jack-Lowden.jpg

    Hmm, not sure I see It. Though I’m sure the same words were said about Craig back in 2005.
  • mtm wrote: »
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    I really wouldn’t use Doctor Who as any kind of ‘how to’. People were told that if they didn’t like it, then don’t watch it. They certainly did that. Even the defence of looking at the consolodated figures, instead of the overnight figures, doesn’t hold up. They might have lost Daily Mail readers, but at least they earned Twitter followers....

    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.

    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.

    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.

    But you said:
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Also, the comparison to Barbara dismissing Bond as a woman isn't the same as her outright saying Bond is and will forever be a white man. The 2 aren't remotely the same. You're comparing apples to otanges.

    They're apples to otanges, except when the same logic applies :D

    Yes they are apples and oranges but that doesn't mean they can't share the sane principle.
  • 00Heaven wrote: »
    Well, doesn't an established IP have to come from somewhere at its roots? You could argue Black Panther had a harder time because he debuted in comics in 1966. All IP and characters have to start somewhere...

    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.
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 12,837
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    So NO it's not just because the film is part of the MCU

    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.
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Talent, work and consistency is what's needed. Not piggy backing and hijacking other IPs.

    Not your IP though is it mate. It’s Barbara Broccoli’s, who’s said Bond can be any colour.
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 328
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    So NO it's not just because the film is part of the MCU

    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.
    Well there's nothing to suggest that's what I think. Again, I mentioned other Marvel IPs as examples who have yet to reach the financial milestone that BP has. Spider-Man is the most popular and lucrative superhero IP in the world and yet after 7 solo films and10 cimetaic appearances he's only hit a $Billion once and that was achieved with his last movie. BP's success is more than just the MCU brand and I despite stating this several times already I'm not sure what it is you're not grasping here.
    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.

    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.
    Making new characters isn’t really happening, at least not when it comes to risky, big budget stuff.

    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?
    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.

    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.
    IP is what sells now, even over starpower.
    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.
    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.

    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.
    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.
    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.
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Talent, work and consistency is what's needed. Not piggy backing and hijacking other IPs.

    Not your IP though is it mate. It’s Barbara Broccoli’s, who’s said Bond can be any colour.

    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.
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 12,837
    @Jimjambond Black Panther being successful doesn’t contradict what I’m saying at all though. Good films do better than bad films, obviously, always will do, and obviously there’s different factors that lead to success. But that doesn’t mean we’re not in a blockbuster climate that values known IP above all else. There are some directors with enough swaying power to get around that, but they tend to be auteurs, a lot of whom aren’t interested in playing in the area we’re talking about. Blockbusters have always been more of a studio driven thing too (some exceptions obviously, Spielberg and co, but generally they’re more commercial enterprises) so I’m not sure why it should be down to Scorcese to make the next Bond. And even those auteurs don’t do as well as they used to. Scorcese’s had to go to streaming for funding. Warner Bros just passed on Nolan’s new film, after years of giving him whatever budget he wanted. The Last Duel just bombed. Meanwhile Eternals might not have got great reviews but it’s still making lots of money, because it’s Marvel.
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    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.

    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.
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    , 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.

    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.
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    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.

    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.
  • Posts: 9,738
    baerrtt wrote: »
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Ancillary characters don't carry the same weight the lead character of a 70 year old IP. Bond isn't going to be anything but white. Mark my words.

    Also, the comparison to Barbara dismissing Bond as a woman isn't the same as her outright saying Bond is and will forever be a white man. The 2 aren't remotely the same. You're comparing apples to otanges.

    If they choose a Poc your reaction will be interesting because quite frankly I have a feeling it will happen.

    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

Sign In or Register to comment.