205 replies to this topic

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

Bond has gotten slammed by political correctness quite enough. He doesn't need to be black simply because 'it's high time we had a black Bond'. Not everyone has to be catered to or looked after.

If this happens then sooner or later people will actually be clamoring for a gay Bond, a woman Bond, Bond the trained cricus bear. It's ridiculous.

[ACE]

What a fascinating thread! Thanks to all involved.

My tuppenceworth.

The original point was would a black Bond work in theory where Bond had all his characteristics intact but just happened to be played by a black actor?

The answer is yes, it would be creatively feasible to do.

Why? To shake things up and have variety.

But there lies the rub. If a good, charismatic black actor merely plays a standard issue Bond where is the creative juice? Implicit is the cultural weight and artistic inheritance of over 40 years of cinematic and cultural character establishment. While each new film stands alone, they undoubtedly rely on their predecessors implicitly to inform the audience of what to expect and who the character of Bond is.

So theoretically a black Bond is possible and artistically relevant BECAUSE it is counter casting. If Bond is to be played colourlessly (no jokes about least favourite actors here), the only frisson garnered from a black actor is the juxtaposition of that "blackness" (but see below) with the artistic expectation of the character.

So, for the same reason, a Bond who has a Cockney accent could also shake things up a bit (countering a perception of Bond's class).

And also a Bond with an American accent (he could still be British) would squeeze some creativity from the series.

And why not have a Bond who is 5 foot something tall? SIS has no height restrictions.

And why not have a Bond with handsome Jewish/Indian/Oriental/Other facial characteristics?

The question is if you are not going to play on the "new" element of casting, what is the artistic point?

While possible, the serious suggestion of it smacks of stunt casting because regardless of whether there has been a Bond before, NOW in 2005, the character of Bond has a burden of expectation on him.

I find the agenda of the topic a little offensive. The "new" element is the taking of a traditionally WASP character with established cinematic and literary traits and changing an element of him to something visually or aurally different. That such a change is usually symbolized by the suggestion of counter-casting in terms of a "Black Bond", I think, is very reductive (see variants suggested above).

Personally, I believe James Bond is a classic literary character and I think the film incarnations capture the spirit and essence of what Fleming created. All the Bonds have been portrayed by handsome, English-sounding (yes, even Connery - his soft burr while not plummy was certainly not the Scots he spoke with or a typical Scottish per se) actors who portray a certain class and background and who have all been obviously white (does not need to be "stated" - this is cinema) with all the implicit cultural expectations contained therein.

You can make Bond black/Cockney/sound-American-but-be-British. However, in doing so you are immediately making a statement which is sort of redundant.

ACE

Edited by ACE, 14 July 2005 - 01:14 AM.

[spynovelfan]

I agree with most of that, ACE, though I'll admit to being weary of the topic. Not sure about the Jewish thing, though - if Jason Isaacs had been cast, I think people wouldn't have blinked (or would have focussed on his hair loss/remarkable physical resemblance to Timothy Dalton). But I did mention the idea of an Asian playing Bond a few times, I think. If they were to go that route, perhaps they could cast the BBC newsreader Matthew Amaroliwala:





I believe SIS does have height restrictions, though I think they lowered them a couple of years ago. Even if they do not have official ones, a very tall or very short person would be unlikely to be given field work, as they'd be too conspicuous.

[ACE]

[quote name='spynovelfan' date='14 July 2005 - 09:26']
I agree with most of that, ACE, though I'll admit to being weary of the topic. [QUOTE]
Well, let's nail this then!

[/QUOTE] Not sure about the Jewish thing, though - if Jason Isaacs had been cast, I think people wouldn't have blinked (or would have focussed on his hair loss/remarkable physical resemblance to Timothy Dalton).[QUOTE]
I'm not saying if an actor is actually Jewish, just that why could they not play Bond if they had more Judaic features a la David Baddiel etc.

[/QUOTE]
But I did mention the idea of an Asian playing Bond a few times, I think. If they were to go that route, perhaps they could cast the BBC newsreader Matthew Amaroliwala:[QUOTE]

I know you did but the topic heading is a Black Bond and Honor Blackman mentions it too. This is reductive and simplistic. That "black" used, simplistically, to suggest non-core changes to the character. Why does no-one say time for a Cockney Bond or an American Bond or an Arab Bond? The only reason changing the ethnicity (or certain other perceived non-core traits of the character) only creatively shake things up by courting controversy informed by the accpeted 40 year odd cinematic history of the character. It only works for newspapers or stirring stuff up about Bond (the average Daily Mail/Express reader probably spat out their Earl Grey when they saw about Colin Salmon - who only acted as Bond in screentests for potential actresses - erroneously reported as a potential new Bond).

It wouldn't give the film-makers any new artistic avenues other than perhaps widen the field of possible Bond actors. But even then, Colin Salmon, if he was white, would not have the career profile to succeed Brosnan in terms of bankability and visibility. In fact apply the SAME criteria for a Brosnan successor and then find a black actor capable of fulfilling those requirements. I suggest there aren't any. Yet. Lord knows, it's difficult enough to find a white actor suitable.

Remember, regardless of an actor's colour, their potential bankability and visibility and ability and credibility in the promotion is vitally important too.

[/QUOTE]
I believe SIS does have height restrictions, though I think they lowered them a couple of years ago. Even if they do not have official ones, a very tall or very short person would be unlikely to be given field work, as they'd be too conspicuous.[QUOTE]

Regardless of whether there are height restrictions in real life (we both need o research this point - MI6 is not like the army, they recruit agents in whatever form they can), I'm not talking about getting a dwarf or giant to play Bond. And remember, height can be disguised on film.

Anyway, my feeling is the raising of the topic especially by newspapers is a slightly cynical way to achieve column inches. It is a sensationalist exploration of something the author of the story does actually even believe in.

It's a bit like postulating on whether a future Royal can be ethnically different or that we somehow need an ethnically different Royal. It probably will happen through marriage. I cannot see what difference it would make. However if that complex issue is reduced to "Can future King be black?" as a headline or topic, it is slightly offensive and simplistic because the response is should be "Of course, why do you even ask?" and "Why just black?".

BTW, I'm not suggesting people on this thread INTENDED to be sensationalist or simplistic or reductive but unless the topic is set up carefully, one cannot help falling into one of the categories above.

ACE

Edited by ACE, 14 July 2005 - 10:22 AM.

[spynovelfan]

Well, I agree with all of that. (Although I think you'd have a hard time finding a decent description of what an actor with 'Judaic features' looked like! Incidentally, I have been told I look a lot like David Baddiel, as well as Ben Elton, David Schwimmer and a young Dustin Hoffman. Whereas I in fact look like a better-looking version of Tom Cruise.)

But I digress. I agree that the notion is reductive, sensationalistic, would not add anything new to the series, is unworkable and so on. But the sensationalism is so transparent I am always surprised people react so vehemently against it. It's a little like Marilyn Manson to me. 'Hmmm, how can I become a rock star? I know, I'll pinch all of Bowie's idea from the Seventies! I'll flirt with fascist imagery! My eyes are the same colour, but that's easily rectified. I'll goosestep, and flirt with images of perversion and - gasp - androgyny. I'll name myself after a screen goddess and a serial killer, and call my album ANTICHRIST SUPERSTAR! If that doesn't get the Mid-West all riled up and bruning my records, nothing will...' What amazes me about this is that such a blatant tactic actually worked. Mr Manson, it seems to me, very cynically and obviously and crassly went out of his way to tick every box in the attempt to garner publicity, and I would have expected people to yawn, or like the music, or not. Amazingly, people reacted precisely in the way he wanted them to. 'He called his album 'Antichrist Superstar!' This man is Satan, and he is influencing our children! Ban him now! Burn his records!' Amazing. There's nothing at all offensive about him other than his lack of originality. But I digress again. For me, the whole 'black Bond' thing is always just an obvious attempt to get people to go 'Noooo! You can't! Bond's white!' What amazes me is people do say that, every time. (Often without reading the thread. ) So I was interested in looking at precisely why the idea would not work in a hypothetical bubble, as story. I think we (you and I) agree it *could*, but is unlikely, and would be pointless, futile, redundant, obsolete and tautological all at the same time, as well as getting a lot of people worked up into a lather and shouting 'Nooooo! Why? you can't! He's white...'

Just occurs to me that that alone is probably the strongest argument I have for doing it.

[ACE]

[quote name='spynovelfan' date='14 July 2005 - 10:15']
[QUOTE]Well, I agree with all of that. (Although I think you'd have a hard time finding a decent description of what an actor with 'Judaic features' looked like! Incidentally, I have been told I look a lot like David Baddiel, as well as Ben Elton, David Schwimmer and a young Dustin Hoffman. Whereas I in fact look like a better-looking version of Tom Cruise.)[/QUOTE]
Oy vey. As my Jewish friends would say, "Someone who isn't obviously a goy!".
Funny, I've always been likened to David Baddiel as well. As well as Alfred Molina. Hmmmm - what was that about hitting every branch on the way down. I would think you looked like Tom Cruise because you appear to be as bright as his smile!
However, you can reach the keyboard but poor Tom...


[QUOTE]But I digress. I agree that the notion is reductive, sensationalistic, would not add anything new to the series, is unworkable and so on. But the sensationalism is so transparent I am always surprised people react so vehemently against it. It's a little like Marilyn Manson to me. 'Hmmm, how can I become a rock star? I know, I'll pinch all of Bowie's idea from the Seventies! I'll flirt with fascist imagery! My eyes are the same colour, but that's easily rectified. I'll goosestep, and flirt with images of perversion and - gasp - androgyny. I'll name myself after a screen goddess and a serial killer, and call my album ANTICHRIST SUPERSTAR! If that doesn't get the Mid-West all riled up and bruning my records, nothing will...' What amazes me about this is that such a blatant tactic actually worked. Mr Manson, it seems to me, very cynically and obviously and crassly went out of his way to tick every box in the attempt to garner publicity, and I would have expected people to yawn, or like the music, or not. Amazingly, people reacted precisely in the way he wanted them to. 'He called his album 'Antichrist Superstar!' This man is Satan, and he is influencing our children! Ban him now! Burn his records!' Amazing. There's nothing at all offensive about him other than his lack of originality. But I digress again.[/QUOTE]
"Every generation throws a hero up the pop charts".
BTW, every country has its "Mid-West" (in the UK, "Midwesterners" read the Mail and the Express!) and many people from the "Mid-West" are capable of seeing things for what they are. But I get your point. But Manson knows what he doing. However, no-one is immune. If I knew what made you tick and deliberately countered your value system, I'm sure I could bring out the "Midwesterner" in you.

[QUOTE]For me, the whole 'black Bond' thing is always just an obvious attempt to get people to go 'Noooo! You can't! Bond's white!' What amazes me is people do say that, every time. (Often without reading the thread. ) So I was interested in looking at precisely why the idea would not work in a hypothetical bubble, as story. I think we (you and I) agree it *could*, but is unlikely, and would be pointless, futile, redundant, obsolete and tautological all at the same time, as well as getting a lot of people worked up into a lather and shouting 'Nooooo! Why? you can't! He's white...'[/QUOTE]
Accepted but that it was obvious (perhaps only to me) you were doing that and I have stated my views on that sort of thing.

[QUOTE]Just occurs to me that that alone is probably the strongest argument I have for doing it.[/QUOTE]
Well, you DID throw up an interesting thread. You know, perhaps you should try journalism as a career.

Anyway, Bond can't be black because he is white!

BTW, it's shut down now but the superb Blofeld's Cat (http://lavender.fort...007/007main.htm) website had a lovely set of original draft Ian Fleming paperback covers that would have brought out the "Midwesterner" in you!

ACE

[spynovelfan]

Oy vey. As my Jewish friends would say, "Someone who isn't obviously a goy!".
Funny, I've always been likened to David Baddiel as well. As well as Alfred Molina. Hmmmm - what was that about hitting every branch on the way down. I would think you looked like Tom Cruise because you appear to be as bright as his smile! 
However, you can reach the keyboard but poor Tom...

You charmer.

"Every generation throws a hero up the pop charts".
BTW, every country has its "Mid-West" (in the UK, "Midwesterners" read the Mail and the Express!) and many people from the "Mid-West" are capable of seeing things for what they are. But I get your point. But Manson knows what he doing. However, no-one is immune. If I knew what made you tick and deliberately countered your value system, I'm sure I could bring out the "Midwesterner" in you.

Of that I have no doubt. In fact, The Daily Mail often does it for me. Particularly Melanie Phillips.

Anyway, Bond can't be black because he is white!

Oh... damn. You got me.

BTW, it's shut down now but the superb Blofeld's Cat (http://lavender.fort...007/007main.htm) website had a lovely set of original draft Ian Fleming paperback covers that would have brought out the "Midwesterner" in you!

I'm intrigued.

[Jack Bauer]

Could we have a white man play Shaft?

I'm not entirely against the idea, but after 20 or so films of having pretty much the same type of guy, it'd be too weird seeing it.

[Bondian]

Bondian in one of his serious moods...

I have an Asian friend who looks just like Timothy Dalton. He even smiles like him, but unfortunately he speaks cockney and works in a grocery.

I did know a black chap once who would of made an excellent James Bond. He was quite tall, suave, elegant and really hit it off with the chicks. He drove a BMW and owned a house in Chelsea.

When I was in Spain in 1971 there were Sean Connery look-alike's all over the place.

If you want to see a Chinese man play James Bond, check out Jet Li in "The One" or "Hitman!".



Isn't it interesting how different races can look the same?.

Cheers,

G. Golfihills

[k13oharts]

Hmmm... with Jet Li's character (Wah Sing Ku) in Lethal Weapon 4 he'd make a great Colonel Sun! (with a speech trainer of course)

[spynovelfan]

Could we have a white man play Shaft?

See page 2 to see why Shaft is not a good example. I know it's a long thread, but just adding to it without reading it doesn't help much. The terms of the discussion moved on quite a bit from just the title. If you read the thread, you might even agree with me. Not that Bond should be black. But that Bond could be black within the terms that I discussed, which were very different.

Then again, you could just not read it and reply by telling me you're not racist, but Bond was white and should stay so. I'll bang my head on my desk and the blood will slowly stain the carpet, and life will go on.

[Skudor]

Is this still going on?

[ACE]

I hope not.

Now we've solved this, we've got global warming and world peace to sort out.

By tea time.

ACE

[Captain Indigo]

let's just stick with white james bonds

[Skin 17]

I think we should stick with the original. EX. I would hate for the producers of Beverly Hills cop to replace the original Axel Foley with a white guy. So I feel the same way about Bond. Just stick to the original it has worked thus far.

[Red Grant 15]

That was a stupid joke man.

[Skin 17]

Yeah Grant is right and you need to learn your cars.

[Red Grant 15]

Bond needs to stay a white guy though. It'd just be weird if he goes from being a white guy for five movies, then turns into a black guy. It'd be like Shaft being a white guy. It's just not done.

[cvheady007]

I think we should stick with the original. EX. I would hate for the producers of Beverly Hills cop to replace the original Axel Foley with a white guy. So I feel the same way about Bond. Just stick to the original it has worked thus far.

The original Axel Foley was supposed to be Sylvester Stallone, but he passed on the script.

There should not now nor should there ever be a James Bond that does not resemble the intended look of the character. That would categorically eliminate an African American from being James Bond, along with many other races. It is certainly not racist...it's just the face of an icon, like Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, etc. There is no need to make this kind of a change. Knock-offs, sure (Billy Dee Williams as Agent Double-O Soul ), but no James Bond.

[Skin 17]

I think we should stick with the original. EX. I would hate for the producers of Beverly Hills cop to replace the original Axel Foley with a white guy. So I feel the same way about Bond. Just stick to the original it has worked thus far.

The original Axel Foley was supposed to be Sylvester Stallone, but he passed on the script.

That might be so but the role has been established as a Black man from Detroit and therefore cannot be white.

[hcmv007]

A black James Bond, heck no he'd be stopped every time when driving an Aston martin DB9.

That was a stupid joke man.

Yeah Grant is right and  you need to learn your cars.

How true

I think we should stick with the original. EX. I would hate for the producers of Beverly Hills cop to replace the original Axel Foley with a white guy. So I feel the same way about Bond. Just stick to the original it has worked thus far.

The original Axel Foley was supposed to be Sylvester Stallone, but he passed on the script.

There should not now nor should there ever be a James Bond that does not resemble the intended look of the character. That would categorically eliminate an African American from being James Bond, along with many other races. It is certainly not racist...it's just the face of an icon, like Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, etc. There is no need to make this kind of a change. Knock-offs, sure (Billy Dee Williams as Agent Double-O Soul ), but no James Bond.

I think we should stick with the original. EX. I would hate for the producers of Beverly Hills cop to replace the original Axel Foley with a white guy. So I feel the same way about Bond. Just stick to the original it has worked thus far.

The original Axel Foley was supposed to be Sylvester Stallone, but he passed on the script.

That might be so but the role has been established as a Black man from Detroit and therefore cannot be white.

Again, true.

Agree or not, this has been one hot topic.

[Buck]

John Shaft would be a better example.


Buck

[ACE]

[quote name='spynovelfan' date='14 July 2005 - 11:43']
[quote name='ACE' date='14 July 2005 - 10:46']

[quote]BTW, it's shut down now but the superb Blofeld's Cat (http://lavender.fort...007/007main.htm) website had a lovely set of original draft Ian Fleming paperback covers that would have brought out the "Midwesterner" in you!
[/quote]

I'm intrigued.

[/quote]

Found it! Drummond Grieve is a genius. With a very cool name.

http://www.ohmss.ohm....com/ohmss.html

Then go to OHMSS pages
Then go to Trivia of Doubtful Veracity

Look at the draft book covers and titles at the bottom of the page.

Shocking, positively shocking

Get twitching!

ACE

Edited by ACE, 02 August 2005 - 08:30 AM.

[wibg]

Let's take a deep look at this. 007 is assigned on very special missions. The enemies he encounters are usually quite wealthy, most of whom go to places....put it this way, if I was 007; they wouldn't let me in the door...to this day. Keep in mind, the people that he is assigned to surveil, help to indict and yes...liquidate are very deviant people who are obsessed with power and to attain such power by any means necessary. All I ask is when sending in an agent that you know will blend in quickly, who would you pick?

[Robert Watts]

It is simple. Bond is based upon a white/caucasian male who was invented by Ian Lancaster Fleming. Therefore the film character should retain the most basic similarities with Fleming's character (there aren't too many left). The film characters have all looked different from each other. But they have all managed to fit into Fleming's physical description of the character. It is not meant to be offensive at all.

Do you give the film character of Harry Potter spiked blonde hair, a golden tan and bulging muscles? No. Do you make Shaft a white, long haired hippie? No. Do you make Dame Edna Everage a man ? No. You don't change a character who is set in stone just to fit with the times (or at least you shouldn't).

Now let's say we all say that we want a white Robinson? (retorical question, I know nobody does) How would you react?

And that Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury is why Bond should be and remain white.

[wibg]

{And that Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury is why Bond should be and remain white.}

The way the world is...I have to agree and he must be British; not to mention, the class and style he carries so well. Remember, when, 007 is assigned on these hi profile missions, he is going against some very evil individuals. They are ruthless; but, engenius in a dyobolical way (sorry about the spelling)They are cunning in everyway. Destroying masses of people is indifferent to them. Anything and anybody hiddering their way must be eliminated; for the sake of attaining as much power as they can. It takes the right man with the right looks and attitude and dedication to stop them.

[Mr. Somerset]

To get in on this topic, gotta say I'd love to see Colin Salmon's Bond in the screentests (as well as Robert Davi's version of oo7).
But I seriously doubt we'll get a black Bond in this particular series. Perhaps if Babs and Mikey sell the rights to the character to a different company/producer?
I think certain characters work when their race is changed. Green Lantern for example comes to mind, and Ving Rhames looked good as Kojak.

[ernst stavro b.]

It really never is time for any Bond, which is different from the original Fleming. I don't understand why somebody could even think of a black Bond. Ok, there was this Salmon rumor, but did anyone really think he would be Bond #6?

What we all need is a Bond that is a person, which is exactly the one that is desribed by Fleming.
You would destroy the whole Bond universum, if a black man would be James Bond 007. After all, everyone who tries to change the character created by Fleming, would make fun of this great author.

That would really be the end of the James Bond we like.
But maybe the birth of a new action hero like xXx or Ethan Hunt ...
Let's hope that that will never be reality!

MfG
ernst

[spynovelfan]

What we all need is a Bond that is a person, which is exactly the one that is desribed by Fleming.

Perhaps you - and a couple of the posters just above you - might like to look at some of the other pages in this thread before jumping into this argument. Because it really did move on quite a long way from these kinds of issues, and nobody was really disputing what severalof you are now adamantly exclaiming as if people did. Quite a different issue was discussed. I realise it's a long thread. I realise that the chances of anyone on the internet not getting pissed off when someone points out in this way that they'vegot the wrong end of the stick is mind-bogglingly small, but let's justsay for once you put aside the irritation that I know you haven't read the whole thread and am pointing it out and take it that, against all likelihood, you're a reasonable person who's capable of opening their mind for a moment. This is why the issue's more complicated, in a nutshell. Look at your above statement.

'What we all need is a Bond that is a person, which is exactly the one that is desribed by Fleming.'

Exactly the one described in Fleming. Really? So you would advocate, then, that the next Bond film should feature an openly racist and sexist character? Who smokes Morland Specials? Who lives in the late 50s? Who gets hopped up on benzedrine and drinks far too much? Are you arguing this as a commercial prospect? It wouldn't work, would it? Here's the rub - *why* would it not work. Answer: because the world has changed, and the exact character Fleming created is no longer acceptable to audiences around the world. A film like that could be made, of course, but it would not be commercially successful. That is why the film-makers got rid of the cigarettes, the benzedrine, the excessive drinking, the racism, the sexism (largely) and hey, even the facial scar. They decided that these things weren't *integral* to the character. Now: is his colour - not his nationality - integral to the character? Perhaps. Perhaps not. *That* is the debate that some of us were having, and I hope you can see that the argument was a little more nuanced than your post and others might suggest. I recommend reading the thread.

[ernst stavro b.]

Hi spyovelfan!

I did read the thread, but just wanted to let you know, that I don't think a Bond, which is different from Ian Fleming's, is what most of us want to see!

I never mentioned wanting a film that is set in our times. I always wanted to see the Fleming novels filmed. As a "period piece", let's put ut that way.
My answer is based on my wish to see a film that is based on Fleming, not on Maibaum and not Purvis or Wade.

I know that not many of you think that way and I know that the producers don't.
And I really want to see Ian's creation on the Silver screen. Nothing more, nothing less. With all its faults ... sexism, racism and so on.

In my world I can't support a black actor playing Bond. Of course, I will see the film. And of course, I will be disappointed.

Maybe you understand me, if not, it wouldn't be your fault;)

MfG
ernst