A black felix?
#91
Posted 17 February 2006 - 07:53 PM
#92
Posted 17 February 2006 - 07:57 PM
Than again why were they persuing the likes of Jolie, Simpson and even Theron for Vesper? Ok lets pretend that never happened and the end product is what matters.
Quality, charisma and merits right? Tell me why did EON even bothered retaining Judi Dench when they could have hired any talented actor to play M for much cheaper price tag while maintaining the "quality"? Fame shouldn't really matter. It's the merits of the actor no? Certainly this would also fix the continuity issues regarding Casino Royale right?
#93
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:02 PM
It's a strong-feelings kidney whichever way you slice it, isn't it?
CB.n - slamming the wasps from the pure apple of truth
#94
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:04 PM
Look if EON is so concerned with the merits, charisma and quality of an actor, why did they cast Denise Richards as a Nuclear Scientist or American Actress Teri Hatcher over Monica Belucci.
Why? MGM.
#95
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:05 PM
#96
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:16 PM
#97
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:22 PM
Than again why were they persuing the likes of Jolie, Simpson and even Theron for Vesper? Ok lets pretend that never happened and the end product is what matters.
We have no evidence that that was nothing but tabloid rumors. With the casting of Green I can't see them considering any one of those actresses.
#98
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:23 PM
Jeffery Wright is a tough actor to argue with. I look forward to his portrayal.
I think that about sums it up.
#99
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:40 PM
Ok what about my other questions?
Look if EON is so concerned with the merits, charisma and quality of an actor, why did they cast Denise Richards as a Nuclear Scientist or American Actress Teri Hatcher over Monica Belucci.
Why? MGM.
Than again why were they persuing the likes of Jolie, Simpson and even Theron for Vesper? Ok lets pretend that never happened and the end product is what matters.
We have no evidence that that was nothing but tabloid rumors. With the casting of Green I can't see them considering any one of those actresses.
I already said what matters more is the end product. So whether it is tabloid rumours or not I don't care anymore. My main question was the retaining of Dench.
Edited by Stratus, 17 February 2006 - 08:41 PM.
#100
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:41 PM
#101
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:43 PM
#102
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:45 PM
That was then this is now, the market has changed. People want character driven films not over the top American action film knockoffs. I give EON a lot of credit for having the guts to change Bond to the times and recast him to fit the new mold. To make this film with Brosnan would have looked ridiculous given the story and direction, especially after his over the top fantasy films.
I'm just interested to hear what people would think if CR had as much (or more) action (or even fantasy) as DAD, but was still character driven? Would the action be okay then?
For example, the Spider-Man movies are obviously very action-oriented, American even. But they are both very character-driven too. The same could be said of the Bourne films.
So is it that people don't like action per se, or just not action without character development (which is what the Brosnan films were to some extent because Bond couldn't go anywhere as a person)?
#103
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:50 PM
That was then this is now, the market has changed. People want character driven films not over the top American action film knockoffs. I give EON a lot of credit for having the guts to change Bond to the times and recast him to fit the new mold. To make this film with Brosnan would have looked ridiculous given the story and direction, especially after his over the top fantasy films.
I'm just interested to hear what people would think if CR had as much (or more) action (or even fantasy) as DAD, but was still character driven? Would the action be okay then?
For example, the Spider-Man movies are obviously very action-oriented, American even. But they are both very character-driven too. The same could be said of the Bourne films.
So is it that people don't like action per se, or just not action without character development (which is what the Brosnan films were to some extent because Bond couldn't go anywhere as a person)?
I think that it also has to do with believable action. The action elements in DAD were largely unbelievable. How seriously can someone take James Bond parasailing down a computer animated wave created by a computer generated chunk of ice? Or, how seriously can someone take virtually all of the action involving the airplane at the end of the film? It's very hard to. But the action in the Bourne films is very realistic, and something that I would imagine most people who are trained in those fields would be able to do quite easily.
But, from looking at the cast and seeing just how many respected names are here (Craig, Wright, Giannini, and Green to a lesser extent), I can't imagine that this film could surpass DAD in terms of over-the-top action or fantasy elements.
#104
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:51 PM
If James Bond ever starts break dancing that is the day I leave the cinematic Bond series for good.
#105
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:55 PM
You know what would be interesting. If they decide to update Bond even more with the times, ie Brokeback Style. Making Bond a bisexual who has homoerotic feelings for Mr. Leiter. I wonder how many people here would support EON for their artistic boldiness and integrity or call it cashing in on the latest trend. It's a theoretical scenario, but this is kind of how I feel about the Leiter casting, it's all in the trend.
If James Bond ever starts break dancing that is the day I leave the cinematic Bond series for good.
Break dancing? What decade are they updating to?
#106
Posted 17 February 2006 - 08:58 PM
'Oh they only cast a black guy to be trendy!'You know what would be interesting. If they decide to update Bond even more with the times, ie Brokeback Style. Making Bond a bisexual who has homoerotic feelings for Mr. Leiter. I wonder how many people here would support EON for their artistic boldiness and integrity or call it cashing in on the latest trend. It's a theoretical scenario, but this is kind of how I feel about the Leiter casting, it's all in the trend.
The movie Bond has always been different from the literary Bond. In the movie Bond white guys of wildly different ages and appearances have been cast as Felix in the past. At least Bond remains a tall good looking bloke. Felix has been young, old, grey, brunette, pretty short, fairly tall - There is no consistancy. So a continuity argument is completely out the window. So if you get the opportunity to cast someone like Wright why shouldn't EON go for it? Which should their priority be, making a great film with a great cast or staying true to fan expectations? They don't give two hoots about fans. And rightly so. Fans won't keep Bond alive and successful.
Edited by Red Renard, 17 February 2006 - 08:59 PM.
#107
Posted 17 February 2006 - 09:08 PM
I love how you guys keep saying Leiter was never consistent so who cares. If you jump off a bridge and you miraculously survive, you should do it again. I love this logic.'Oh they only cast a black guy to be trendy!'
You know what would be interesting. If they decide to update Bond even more with the times, ie Brokeback Style. Making Bond a bisexual who has homoerotic feelings for Mr. Leiter. I wonder how many people here would support EON for their artistic boldiness and integrity or call it cashing in on the latest trend. It's a theoretical scenario, but this is kind of how I feel about the Leiter casting, it's all in the trend.![]()
![]()
The movie Bond has always been different from the literary Bond. In the movie Bond white guys of wildly different ages and appearances have been cast as Felix in the past. At least Bond remains a tall good looking bloke. Felix has been young, old, grey, brunette, pretty short, fairly tall - There is no consistancy. So a continuity argument is completely out the window. So if you get the opportunity to cast someone like Wright why shouldn't EON go for it? Which should their priority be, making a great film with a great cast or staying true to fan expectations? They don't give two hoots about fans. And rightly so. Fans won't keep Bond alive and successful.
What makes you so sure there were no other caucasian actors on the same level field? Let's pretend there was none. With this logic why can't M be someone new with talent as well instead of a "recognizable face". To QUOTE YOU "Which should their priority be, making a great film with a great cast or staying true to fan expectations?" Fan in this case being the public who sees a recognizable face in Dench.
They are doing a reboot, they have a chance to make changes. To learn from the mistakes and inconsistencies of the past continuity. NOT REPEAT IT AGAIN FOR A NEW GENERATION. These quirks are not all that difficult to fix either and will not impact the "quality" of the story as long as it is good.
I have been arguing for a better Bond film from the start as oppose to reboot, but now they are doing the reboot, they should take advantage of the fact.
#108
Posted 17 February 2006 - 09:28 PM
What makes you so sure there were no other caucasian actors on the same level field? Let's pretend there was none. With this logic why can't M be someone new with talent as well instead of a "recognizable face".
Because they wanted Dench and didn't care that she was in previous Bond films. They thought the audience would be intelligent enough to cope. Because they liked and wanted Wright. They thought the audience wouldn't actually be so blinkered as to only see a black face. I'm shocked, to be honest.
#109
Posted 17 February 2006 - 09:28 PM
That is the weirdest line of logic I've read in a while...I love how you guys keep saying Leiter was never consistent so who cares. If you jump off a bridge and you miraculously survive, you should do it again. I love this logic.
I'm not saying who cares. I'm saying get the best guy for the role. I'm saying it doesn't really matter that Felix was white in the books, because (a)Skin colour isn't an important factor in the character and (b)the movies don't follow the books that closely anyway (BIG surprise aye?)
What makes you so sure the skin colour came into the casting? Hmm? That they deliberately and maliciously sought out a black actor to be 'trendy'? He was probably the best guy that auditioned, one who brings a bit of rep with him to the job and the producers didn't give two hoots that he was black.What makes you so sure there were no other caucasian actors on the same level field?
As for Dench... well gotta agree with you there. It's puzzling they kept her on. If they're making a break they should make a clean break. But hey, no biggie.
#110
Posted 17 February 2006 - 09:36 PM
I actually never saw Daredevil. I was a huge fan of the comics and didn't like the look, or Affleck, or Garner, so I waited for the reviews, and when they were bad, I didn't bother. So I was more going on the impression from previews and such.Nice post, Kara.
Michael Clarke Duncan was right for the Kingpin in DAREDEVIL.
Not completely with you on this though. John Rhys-Davies was a much better Kingpin when he played him. Nothing to do with race though, Rhys-Davies just had a better screen presence.
#111
Posted 17 February 2006 - 09:38 PM
The guy who played Felix in TLD was white..yea he was amazing wasn't he...
Jeff Wright is a really excellent actor's actor and will bring a superb quality to this support role.
#112
Posted 17 February 2006 - 09:46 PM
Why do you have to fall back on that old "politically correct" saw? It's ridiculous! Why can't they just have cast Jeffrey Wright because they wanted him? By saying they did it because they "wanted political correctness," you're saying they chose a random black actor to fill the pc shoes. What an insult to a fine actor!They should have gotten a black M instead of a black Felix if they wanted political correctness. This would have solved the Dench continuity problem and still fill their urge of being politically correct. Don't tell me EON didn't have this in mind, Bond doesn't bloody smoke anymore for one thing. Let's just hope Bond doesn't get emasculated by Dench to please the feminists.
And puh-leeze! about your feminist remark. So nice to know that people still buy that nonsense about feminists wanting to "emasculate" men.
What I never understand is why, if feminists want to emasculate men, we also want access to birth control. What do we need it for if the men don't have the reproductive parts?
The dialogue and the racism are two different issues. Fleming was not good at American dialogue at all, whether black or white. Set that aside.Hmmm...
Isn't this saying he wasn't a very good writer of dialogue, though, rather than that he was a racist? If he had had a poor ear for white upper-class English idiom, would he have necessarily disliked white upper-class English people? Not having a good ear for how blacks in Harlem spoke isn't the same as being a racist, is it?
Fleming's racism was present in all his novels. In DAF he compares Italian-Americans to "real Americans;" (they're not, according to Fleming, just a bunch of "spaghetti eaters"). In LALD, all blacks are part of a vast conspiracy unknown to whites. In OHMSS, the reason that Tracy has psychological problems is because her parents are of different nationalities; "mixed blood," according to Fleming, confuses a person and ruins their lives. I could cite examples from every novel without even breaking a sweat.
Just to clarify, it has been banned in some school districts in some towns in the States.Twain handled it masterfully, but there are still readers stupid enough to think if an author uses the n-word, he's racist (which is why Huck Finn has been banned in the States).
Edited by Kara Milovy, 17 February 2006 - 09:41 PM.
#113
Posted 17 February 2006 - 09:50 PM
#114
Posted 17 February 2006 - 09:57 PM
Fleming's racism was present in all his novels. In DAF he compares Italian-Americans to "real Americans;" (they're not, according to Fleming, just a bunch of "spaghetti eaters"). In LALD, all blacks are part of a vast conspiracy unknown to whites. In OHMSS, the reason that Tracy has psychological problems is because her parents are of different nationalities; "mixed blood," according to Fleming, confuses a person and ruins their lives. I could cite examples from every novel without even breaking a sweat.
Sorry, but I think that's nonsense. Bond also greatly admires Draco, who is a rapist and a gangster and a pimp - and a Corsican. He has Bond fall in love with Tracy, who is pictured as his ideal accompaniment. And Bond is also of mixed blood, but we're never told he's confused or mentally unstable. In LALD, Mr Big has a massive network of negroes working for him as part of his gang - he doesn't have all blacks in the world working for him, and it's never implied he does. There is some racism in Fleming, certainly, but it's pretty mild by the standards of the time and for this genre. The characterisation of Drax is clearly anti-German, for instance. But then Goldfinger seems both a German and a Jewish stereotype simultaneously - and yet he's aparently English. Almost all spy thrillers are 'racist' in that they inevitably have a 'bullet-headed' Russian thug or somesuch. Disney's Winnie The Pooh cartoons are 'racist' because all the characters are American apart from Owl, who has an upper-class English accent to denote he's clever. And so on.
I don't buy your thesis at all. You may well be able to cite examples from every novel without breaking a sweat, but they're pretty lousy examples.
#115
Posted 17 February 2006 - 10:08 PM
#116
Posted 17 February 2006 - 10:15 PM
Normally I'd be against a black Felix Leiter but this is a "reboot" so it doesn't matter. Casino Royale is going to be great. If Mr. Wright
is a convincing American CIA agent then I'll be happy. I rented Shaft and The Manchurian Candidate today.
Ehh he's only in the Manchurian Candidate for a few minutes, though he does make an impression with his small role. But watch it anyway, its pretty good, and supposed Vesper candidate Vera Farmiga is also in it. He is a total riot in SHAFT though, with many scenes opposite potential Bond Christian Bale.
#117
Posted 17 February 2006 - 10:16 PM
#118
Posted 17 February 2006 - 10:18 PM
Anyway, I think the casting of Felix is great! I've always enjoyed Casey as Leiter and put him just below Jack Lord as the best. Fleming doesn't need to be White or Black, he just needs to be a stron American on par with Bond.
#119
Posted 17 February 2006 - 10:25 PM
I thought they were after the quality fo acting not rep. As for the caucasian comment I said "Let's pretend there was none." and went on about Dench...That is the weirdest line of logic I've read in a while...I love how you guys keep saying Leiter was never consistent so who cares. If you jump off a bridge and you miraculously survive, you should do it again. I love this logic.
I'm not saying who cares. I'm saying get the best guy for the role. I'm saying it doesn't really matter that Felix was white in the books, because (a)Skin colour isn't an important factor in the character and (b)the movies don't follow the books that closely anyway (BIG surprise aye?)What makes you so sure the skin colour came into the casting? Hmm? That they deliberately and maliciously sought out a black actor to be 'trendy'? He was probably the best guy that auditioned, one who brings a bit of rep with him to the job and the producers didn't give two hoots that he was black.What makes you so sure there were no other caucasian actors on the same level field?
As for Dench... well gotta agree with you there. It's puzzling they kept her on. If they're making a break they should make a clean break. But hey, no biggie.
What makes you so sure there were no other caucasian actors on the same level field? Let's pretend there was none. With this logic why can't M be someone new with talent as well instead of a "recognizable face".
Because they wanted Dench and didn't care that she was in previous Bond films. They thought the audience would be intelligent enough to cope. Because they liked and wanted Wright. They thought the audience wouldn't actually be so blinkered as to only see a black face. I'm shocked, to be honest.
Didn't care she was in a previous Bond? From what I last recalled, they kept her because she was in the previous Bond films; familar face. Why not recast with another lesser known actor? Its cheaper and creatively speaking even better. It's not like she is the best actor ever for the role.
Them wanting Wright is a circular argument. Yea sure I bet they liked him. Why? That is the whole point of this argument in the first place.
Anyways I don't care now, he has been cast now and we can't change a thing about it.
#120
Posted 17 February 2006 - 10:29 PM
It doesn't matter much to me. We've already had a black Felix, no reason why we can't have another.
Yup, and this is an inspired choice at that. I was really going to miss Bond having a black comrade in Robinson, but now Felix portrayed by a black actor will replace Robinson in a sense. And Wright is the perfect guy for the part. I think the only character IMHO who can't be black is Bond himself, but other than that, I enjoy the presence of black actors and actresses in important roles because they have unique styles of acting and various intangibles that cannot be found in other actors.

