Black Bond Actor?
JamesBondJunior
Posts: 67MI6 Agent
Could you ever see a black man cast as James Bond? I think the role should always go to the most fitting man in his generation. But should skin color play a part? Nationality sure hasn't. We've had an Irish James, Scottish James and an Australian James. And none of them really resemble each other. And never forget that the character seems to change age and exists in a world where popular culture and technology is never consistent.
I think that I have met mostly black men who have reminded me of Sean Connery or Daniel Craig. I could see an Asian actor personify Timothy Dalton. Race just doesn't seem very important in casting the character. Besides, "Live and Let Die" and "You Only Live Twice", his race has never really been brought up.
I think that I have met mostly black men who have reminded me of Sean Connery or Daniel Craig. I could see an Asian actor personify Timothy Dalton. Race just doesn't seem very important in casting the character. Besides, "Live and Let Die" and "You Only Live Twice", his race has never really been brought up.
Comments
I'm already annoyed at the fact that Daniel Craig doesn't have dark hair. He looks nothing like Bond. Granted, he plays the role well, but so did Timothy Dalton. I haven't warmed to Daniel Craig as Bond as much as I did Timothy Dalton, Sean Connery or George Lazenby. The fact that a woman plays M is another thing that needs to change - back to the roots established in the Fleming novels. Fleming's books described all the major characters' appearance, so I would prefer the actors who play those characters to bear at least some resemblance to the character described.
I wonder what we'll have next ... Jane Bond, 007 perhaps? 8-)
I do like J Wright as Leiter, But no change for Bond Please.
Hell no!
http://apbateman.com
Thank you for putting up your point of view. It's always a delicate matter when race is involved in a discussion, even a very "light" one like this one. It's great to have your point of view as a black man, since it clearly comes with no bias. I'm glad you better explained the point I was making. I am absolutely not opposed to black actors in many roles, and I love quite a few black actors, but as you said and as I said above, Bond is a WASP. So I really can't see a black actor portraying him. I agree with you on the other Bond roles. It doesn't bother me to see M portrayed by a woman and I'm absolutely in favor of a black Felix Leiter. But Bond is just not changeable that much. I don't even like Craig in the part because to me he doesn't look the part at all, let alone someone who on top of everything else can't ever convince me they're a WASP
Hi there, I see this topic has enticed your appetite for more Bond news. Even about what socks he's going to wear I guess? anything but this
I agree with you on the race matter. It saddens me and disgusts me to see certain types of comments online, and I'm very happy everyone is civilly discussing the matter here. If Bond were to be black (and that's not the case, but in theory) as I said previously I think Denzel would've been a great Bond back in the day. I agree that he would make a formidable villain. I'm not entirely sure he's too expensive to be cast as the villain. They've had big actors as villains before, and honestly it's time for Bond to have a much better opponent than those he had in CR and QoS. They need, first off, to pen a villain that is more believable and more "traditionally" Bond villain (for lack of a better adjective) for things to improve. Then they need better actors in the part. Which is when we can have Denzel in the part
If I had to pick a black actor for Bond (just in theory), I'd like Mehcad Brooks. Young actor but not too young (30), very athletic, stylish, and good actor. Just theory though. The practical result instead better be that the next Bond is Henry Cavill
Absolutely not. If an actor who is not a white anglo saxon person portrayed Bond, I'd boycott the series. That person, to me, would not be Bond. It's bad enough that the current actor doesn't look much like the Bond that Fleming described. It's bad enough that M is being played by a woman. Sorry, I will not bow to political correctness at the expense of adhesion to Fleming's novels. We have already strayed too far from the original Fleming concept, we should not, and must not allow it stray any further. The line must be drawn here, this far and no further!
I agree that there are lines that shouldn't and won't be crossed. This is not about being 23 years old at all and/or having a more "open-minded" vision of the world. Starting from the fact the rest of us here aren't exactly 100 years old (I'm over 30 but not THAT far from 23
This is called coherence and respect for the original character. It won't change with the years because Bond is not a black character, he is not an Asian character and he is not any other ethnicity. He is a WASP and he will go on being a WASP for however long the franchise goes on, simple as that. Elizabeth Bennet from Pride and Prejudice is a WASP too. This is a novel that's been turned into movies and miniseries ever since the 30s. We're EIGHTY years later and a couple or so years ago they did the umpteenth version of it with Keira Knightley. Do you think Elizabeth ever changed ethnicity or hair color even during the 80 years that passed and the many both television and movie versions of the novel? Never. Ever. And neither did the other main characters in the story. (other than maybe Bingley, whose hair color was a ridiculous "reddish" in the Keira Knightley movie version).
With Bond they've been already too generous letting the character change hair color, and personally I am opposed to it. I am in the annoyed camp because Craig doesn't look like Fleming's Bond at all in my opinion. Yet at the very least he's the right ethnicity
http://apbateman.com
White Anglo Saxon Protestant. It's used in the US in particular...
Whilst at Fan Fest earlier this year, there was a group of people canvassing the celebrities and others asking this same question for a video - some of the answers may surprise you, the trailer for this can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GUuN6KJTTU
as to whether my answer will be included in the final cut remains to be seen - I actually gave two, one with reference to 007 and the other with reference to Felix - although only one was recorded.
's sakes!
And I think its ridiculous that anyone would care that James Bond is blond. That effects the story and quality of the film in no way whatsoever. Grow up.
And your Pride and Prejudice argument is silly because that is not a character that molds with the times. In fact, she came from a story, time and place that is actually based its importance on race and background. James Bond in 2011 does not.
I get your point JamesBondJunior about the Bond character evolving beyond Fleming's parameters BUT I do feel some aspects of the character are "supporting beams" so to speak to the person of James Bond.
Blackleiter seems to put it perfectly for me.
Without certain ingredients a Martini ceases to be a Martini. We can add olives, or lemon peel, or substitute Lillet Blanc for Kina Lillet and it will remain a Martini, but take out the Vodka and the Gin and it replace these "ingredients" from the original designer or maker and it becomes a Capriosca, or a Whisky Sour… etc.
I mean is John Shaft still John Shaft if he was played by Jason Statham?
Answer: Of course not.
He'd be no more convincing in that role than a black actor would be at portraying an ex Royal Navy and SBS Commander now serving MI6 officer, who was brought up as a privileged orphan with a public school education and an Oxbridge degree. It's not a negative reflection in any way, just part of the way things were/are. A massive part of the MI6 recruitment brief is for their people to fit in where they serve. Like it or not in the case of Bond, his history and present is white. I am sure there are MI6 spooks in Somalia that are black African in descent, and Chinese descended agents operating in the street and corridors of Beijing.
In conclusion a black James Bond? No.
A black MI6 double "O" in other related adventures? Hell yes.
In fact come on EON there could be a whole family of double "O" spin-offs here to make money from. Of course as from 03/12/2010 that idea is mine and I will want a cut.
-{ -{ -{ -{ -{ working on getting the sixth one into the same evening's session.
Oscar Wilde
With all due respect, it is your radical views that will kill off the character of James Bond, not the other way around. If you want to have a black person play an MI6 double-O agent, go right ahead, but that person cannot be James Bond because Bond is Fleming's invention. We are not free to twist that invention any way we please. It would dishonour Fleming's memory, and it will ruin the work that Fleming has put in to creating this character that we all love. In my view, all the major characters in a Bond film should at least resemble somewhat the characters that Fleming described in his works, and as I alluded to earlier, we have already strayed too far in that respect. I'm all for getting rid of Dame Judi Dench as M, as good an actor as she is, because M in Fleming's novels is not a woman. Neither was Felix Leiter or James Bond black. Would you like it if they hired a woman to play James Bond? No, don't answer that, after all, you're all for being more "open" ...
Call me a Bond purist. Call me a Fleming purist. I don't care, I'd display that title proudly. It's true that when Fleming was alive, it is unthinkable that a black man would work for Her Majesty's government in such a position as that of James Bond. Yes, there are a lot of black politicians, and yes, there is a black American president. That has absolutely nothing to do with the character of James Bond. If you want a black man to play an MI6 Double-O alongside James Bond, I have no problems with that. But a black man cannot, nor can he ever be James Bond, unless of course he happens to have the same name, but he cannot be the same character.
Wrong. What about the Martini, shaken, not stirred? The Aston Martin (or for us purists, the Bentley)? The Walther PPK? The Bond girls? The jokes were never in Fleming's novels, and while they were refreshing in Connery's and Dalton's era, they were a pain in the Moore era. James Bond is not a comedian, it is not his job to crack wise remarks. The PC brigade may have taken away his cigarettes, but that would be the only characteristic of Bond that is gone.
I will grant that Daniel Craig is a good actor and he plays his role as James Bond well. You may well find it ridiculous that we Bond purists are so petty, but the fact is, James Bond has dark hair. This is how he was written. Perhaps if Daniel Craig was willing to dye his hair dark brown/black for his Bond films, I wouldn't be so up in arms about it. I enjoy the Craig films, and you're right, it does not affect the story or the quality of the film. But Daniel Craig doesn't look like James Bond.
James Bond doesn't change colour over time. He doesn't change sex over time. Granted, he may change his hair colour over time like anybody else. But a black man cannot be James Bond, because the character is built on the one that was initially designed by Ian Fleming. James Bond also came from a story, time and place too - he was born in Scotland to a Swiss mother and an English father. He was educated at Eton. He was in the Royal Navy, and achieved the rank of Commander. You cannot simply displace that with another background, because then that character would cease to be James Bond.
I apologise if I sound harsh, but this is one thing that I feel extremely passionate about. Storylines for movies may change, but we cannot simply change the character. To do so would be the death of James Bond as we know it.
Also, the Pride and Prejudice comparison very well stands because it's about a literary character. Elizabeth Bennett is as much of a literary character as James Bond, she's been represented for 80 years and they could've picked MANY different looks in actresses to portray her. Instead, they never even changed her HAIR color throughout the years, so I don't see why another character who is precisely described in Fleming's novels would have to change either. Fleming said Bond is tall, DARK-haired and handsome. He's also white. Well Craig is not tall or imposing, he's blond and IMO not particularly handsome either. He certainly can hold his own as an actor, which is good, but I think he looks nothing like James Bond should look based on the features picked by the guy who created him. I like James Bond because he is James Bond, not because he is some random dude with none of the characteristics the original character has. The original character IS Bond. Bond isn't some random adaptation of said original character.
Fleming did a job and created a specific character with specific features. Straying too far away from those means very simply not representing James Bond. You do a generic action movie, not a James Bond movie if that is the case. Pretty much the way I felt about both CR (as I said, boooring for me) and QoS (which I thought just wasn't good enough). And a black Bond is absolutely out of question in this sense, which isn't about open-mindedness at all, it is about making the character become something he absolutely isn't. He's a WASP, and that can't change, because it's a fundamental part of who he is. Part of his education, culture and way of behaving. It would be ridiculous to turn him into something he isn't.
I would also note, that per previous posts, it's been stated by someone who is actually black that they would never want Bond to be black. This isn't about race at all. Or about being open-minded. It's about not overturning a character and turning him into someone he isn't and never has been.
Ah, another demographic of ethniticity I fail to fall into... god bless these ethnic/religious divides...
http://apbateman.com
God bless Fleming because he created the source material for the character I love. The first draft. But I fell in love with the cinematic James Bond that is still evolving today. As soon as these books became films and a large franchise, Fleming's vision could be interpreted any way the producers see fit. What I think you are avoiding is that the cinematic Bond is a very different and more popular character than Fleming's original James Bond. Fleming's Bond wouldn't do many of things that we've seen in the films.
Someone please tell me how changing THE CINEMATIC Bond's physical characteristics would change the story in any way. The Bond who changes height, looks, attitude, accent and time period with each new film. Please enlighten me. Changing his gender is obvious and something we all know will never happen. Some of you all seem to think changing Bond's color or build will lead to Bond ceasing to be Bond. Will he still work for M16? Yes. Can he say most if not all of the dialogue the past Bond actors could? Yes. Could he still be a believable hero? Yes. I think what defines the character to most people are these things and not how Ian Fleming described him upon his creation, before anyone knew there would be a 50 year old film and book franchise that far exceeds Fleming's vision and collection of stories.
I get that to some Craig shouldn't be Bond because he doesn't look like the man who created him. But Fleming was impressed with the Scottish Sean Connery and actually add Scottish blood to the character in tribute. Fleming is dead, so we can not worry about every little grievance he would have, especially when he seemed to understand how cinema would change his vision. I personally believe that if Fleming is aware of what's happening to his films, he wouldn't care about Craig having blond hair and thick frame, as long as the films are good and Bond's legacy continues to grow. Times change and if Fleming were still alive or a modern writer I think that this whole argument about race and HAIR COLOR OF ALL THINGS would be silly to him. -{
It's like going around in circles here. There is NO good reason whatsoever to change ANYTHING in Bond's aspect. Of course his face will change because the actors need to change as they age or as they pursue other project. But the physical as well as personality characteristics should ALWAYS remain the same. That's what the character is. And nobody has a right to change any of that. You clearly have never written anything? Because I can assure you, a writer ponders VERY carefully how to make a character look. Hair color included. And no, I don't think Fleming would find it "silly" at all. (also please stop dismissing others' ideas and calling them "silly". Disagree and avoid that type of comment please? It's offensive).
Fleming, like any other writer, would find it incredibly offensive that someone thought they were entitled to CHANGE anything in the character that HE created without having any right to do so and for absolutely no good reason whatsoever. Why do you want to change Bond? For what reason? There's no good reason whatsoever to change anything in the character and more than that, NOBODY is entitled to do it because this is Fleming's character. The only one who was entitled to make changes to the character was him, and nobody else.
http://apbateman.com
I think we're on the same page here, Secret. I think that James Bond (especially the film character) is such a staple AND has been played by so many different men already (only 7 actors in) that it would be logical and cool to have black actors put in the running when they cast from now on. I think it could have a great impact on the series. The series has moved away from Fleming's version over the years because it has to. Some elements just don't fit now like the Cold War plots, social graces and style of storytelling. All we can do is build on Fleming's tales and hopefully the series will continue to prosper. Preserving as much of Fleming's vision is important and respectful, but after time, skin color means little. I think casting a black actor before say 2005 wouldn't have worked. But I think we're at a point in human history where the majority would approve. I guess not on this forum 8-)
Yes, there have been six actors to play Bond so far, and only one of them has been blond. But they all have one thing in common: They're all WASPs. That is the sort of character that Bond is, you cannot cast anyone to play Bond, he has to fit the description, even loosely. Granted, none of the Bond actors look alike, but they are all tall, dark (hair, not skin) and handsome. You don't cast a black man to play James Bond any more than you would to cast a woman. It isn't progess, it's blasphemy. As far as the character of James Bond is concerned, everything written by Ian Fleming is gospel, and that's the way it should be.
Does that make it right? Does the fact that the cinematic Bond character has changed somewhat over time, make it any more right? The character may have changed a little, but it has stayed within the framework of someone who is a WASP, with (mostly) dark hair (Daniel Craig should dye his hair for his next Bond appearance!). Working for the MI6 and carrying a Double-O number is only his job description, it doesn't define his character. It is illogical to say that anyone who plays a character that works for the MI6 with a Double-O number can be James Bond, because that's not all there is to the Bond character.
Why, then, do you say that "gender is obvious and something we all know will never happen", but yet when it comes to race, you seem adamant that it will happen? After all, isn't equal opportunity all in the name of progress?
You do not hire a woman to play a male character any more than you would hire a black man to play a white man's character. The formula for making a good film, and the formula for making a good Bond film are not the same. You can have a great movie but a crap Bond movie at the same time. A good Bond movie has to be "Bondian" in nature, in story, in every aspect. It has to follow Fleming's concept or it will not work. Not every Bond movie that has been made is a success. You argue that Bond has changed over time, but does that mean the series has succeeded time and time again whenever there was a change? Look at Die Another Day as an example - there was far, far more special effects and gadgets used than there had been in previous Bond films. It was a major change from its predecessors. It turned out to be one of the worst Bond films ever made. Then look at From Russia With Love - the plot, the characters etc were very closely aligned (albeit not exactly) to the novel, and there was minimal gadgets (just Bond's briefcase), and that was arguably the best Bond film ever made. Change does not always equal progress, and certainly does not always equal success. You're arguing that change is necessary to keep the Bond character interesting, but quite frankly, that's a load of rubbish. The storylines may change, but the character does not.
You're right, before Craig's appointment to the position I was adamant that he shouldn't have been Bond. His performances so far have made me eat my words. But I still stand by my view that he doesn't look anything like Bond, and yet he refuses to do something about it. As for writing a Scottish ancestry into Bond, Fleming never mentioned Bond's ancestry before, so he hasn't contradicted himself in that aspect. Fleming introduced an aspect of the character he created - that is something, as the creator of the character, is entitled to do. The producers, the fans etc don't own the character and are not free to change it as they please. I have no problem with Fleming writing Scottish ancestry into Bond. Like I said before, when it comes to the character, everything that Fleming writes is gospel. There's a reason why I haven't read any Bond novel not written by Fleming, nor do I intend to do so.
This forum is a representation of the views of a select group of Bond fans. I'm not the only one who thinks that the character should not change skin colour any more than he should become a she. This isn't about being closed minded, it's about preserving the essence of the character and the sanctity of Fleming's work. Looks like you're outnumbered ...