The inevitability of a black Bond

http://www.latinoreview.com/news/idris-elba-comments-on-possibility-of-being-james-bond-14900

"It's a rumor. I just don't want to be the black James Bond. Sean Connery wasn't the Scottish James Bond, and Daniel Craig wasn't the blue-eyed James Bond, so if I played him, I don't want to be called the black James Bond."

More of the story at the link above.

What really gets me about a story like this (among many things) are the stupid comments from people in the talk back sections of these movie sites stating how "perfect" Idris Elba would be for the role. "Perfect"? The man looks nothing like James Bond. Not even close. If you can't get the look of Bond right, how can you get the feel of Bond correct?

The day anyone other than a white male is cast as Bond is the day I quit the series. I've already been pushed to the limit with Daniel Craig; I won't accept any further revisions.

"The day anyone other than a white male is cast as Bond is the day I quit the series."

The same, obviously.

I don't have a problem with a black Bond. We've had a female M and a black Felix Leiter, so I don't see how any further deviation from the novels makes any difference.

The main thing is that the films are entertaining. I don't want to come out of the cinema feeling like I've just been set upon by a bunch of chuggers.

Couldn't care less.

The problem with a black Bond--and I think it's a matter of when, not if--is that it will signify the complete conquest of Bond by the Left. And I know some of you think the conquest has already occurred, but it has not. There is room for Bond to tack far to the left of what we saw in QOS.

They've stripped the character of so much already. Why would this be the thing that makes you give up on it Khanners?

I'm more annoyed by the fact that they took the fun out of the character completely...

Perilagu Khan wrote:

There is room for Bond to tack far to the left of what we saw in QOS.

Not under Babs, Mendes, or Craig there isn't.

Sharky wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

There is room for Bond to tack far to the left of what we saw in QOS.

Not under Babs, Mendes, or Craig there isn't.

Oh yes there is. QOS was heavily politicized by Bond standards, but it was far from a down-the-line Leftist tract. When Bond is black we will see Michael Moore meets Bourne. Well, I won't see it.

I tell you when you gonna get the black Bond: when medical advancement has come so far that you can choose you colour each morning, choose between pink, blue, green and aubergine, that is.

Otherwise it's not going to happen. Period.

Not because of all this cissy whining about bridges not even built as yet. They don't give a shit. It just won't happen because everybody would be aware it's a desperate fluff stunt to get attention and it would just come across as cheap fishing for compliments. Whoever was cast could never live up and THAT'S why it's just no go.

And that's why I don't care.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

The problem with a black Bond--and I think it's a matter of when, not if--is that it will signify the complete conquest of Bond by the Left. And I know some of you think the conquest has already occurred, but it has not. There is room for Bond to tack far to the left of what we saw in QOS.

Well, you certainly hit the nail upon the head in more ways than one.

I'm also of the opinion that, in some instances, *race matters*. Bond is not an exception. He's not an interchangeable character. You can't just make him Asian or Black or Jewish and keep the core essence of the man. The people who blindly repeat "race/skin is just a pigment color" have deluded and brainwashed themselves into believing that racial identity is not a factor in the way some people see themselves and their lives, or doesn't contribute to the choices people make on how to behave. It's why black Americans have an expression "acting white" that they use among themselves. There is a white culture and system of values, and it is different than black culture or Asian culture or Latino culture or Jewish culture or Native American culture or European culture or Russian culture. It needs to be acknowledged, respected, and left alone, rather than experimented upon; it is not a culture in need of fixing, and if other cultures want to have a successful film series and character that is beloved by the world for 50 years, they need to go out and create one rather than piggy-back on the hard work and success of the author and original producers to make it what it is today.

I double-dog dare EON to make Bond black. I will quit the series and run an anti-Bond website so fast it will make EON's head spin.

What would be the Jewish culture then? Two of my rabbis could not explain that to me. The had three opinions and ended up in a brawl.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I double-dog dare EON to make Bond black. I will quit the series and run an anti-Bond website so fast it will make EON's head spin.

Tempted to urge them, just for the fun of seeing this.

Salomé wrote:

I'm more annoyed by the fact that they took the fun out of the character completely...

Yep. When you watch Craig's Bond do you really want to be him? Is there any man here who would have left Solange as he did? Not so much coitus interruptus as coitus non-startus.

He's fucking hopeless. I mean that literally.

Kennon wrote:

What would be the Jewish culture then?

Bond would be living with his mother Shoshanah, be in a constant state of existential turmoil and neurosis, and fail to get laid.

Sharky wrote:

Kennon wrote:

What would be the Jewish culture then?

Bond would be living with his mother Shoshanah, be in a constant state of existential turmoil and neurosis, and fail to get laid.

In other words: Dench's M is called Shoshanah? It true then, we have a Jewish Bond.

Bond is gornisht helfn.

Oigevalt! Yiddish!

Kennon wrote:

It just won't happen because everybody would be aware it's a desperate fluff stunt to get attention and it would just come across as cheap fishing for compliments.

Bet you never thought you'd see Bond in a dress either. And for the very same reasons.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Bet you never thought you'd see Bond in a dress either. And for the very same reasons.

Context is everything. In DAF, Bond in a dress wouldn't have mattered. With humourless, dour, boo-hoo-I'm-sorry-I'm-a-man Bond (aka Craig) it was mortifying.

There's much truth in that, Amblerious. And that's why I've never been fussed by Blofeld in drag as some are. That little stunt simply fit into the DAF schema, and it was not attempting to make ideological points.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Kennon wrote:

It just won't happen because everybody would be aware it's a desperate fluff stunt to get attention and it would just come across as cheap fishing for compliments.

Bet you never thought you'd see Bond in a dress either. And for the very same reasons.

And I didn't see him in a dress, haven't seen the ad, don't plan to either. What the eye don't see...

Perilagu Khan wrote:

And that's why I've never been fussed by Blofeld in drag as some are. That little stunt simply fit into the DAF schema, and it was not attempting to make ideological points.

Mr. Blofeld at Cb.n disagreed. He told me Joe Orton would have been outraged by that scene.

Mr. Blofeld wrote:

Have you ever even read Orton? He'd do crossdressing, for sure, but not in such a dumb manner; he'd do it to turn the viewers' image of the man doing the crossdressing on its head -- so, how does Blofeld dressed like an old woman spending her pension money deviously upturn our image of him in any way?

It's absurd, and not in any Beckett-esque sort of way...

FFS.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Kennon wrote:

It just won't happen because everybody would be aware it's a desperate fluff stunt to get attention and it would just come across as cheap fishing for compliments.

Bet you never thought you'd see Bond in a dress either. And for the very same reasons.

Kind of thought it was inevitable that we would.

My main issue with the discussion of this topic so far is the use of the terms left and right. While the terms can be convenient for quickly identifying the motives of a social or political issue, the problem is that using such language assumes there exists a certain motive. When you look at QoS, I think it's more important to ask 'what was the intent?' over saying 'that scene seemed left because x,y,z." The world is shrinking. Globalization is a natural event as the difficulties in international communication diminish. Some would see that as 'left' but in reality it's just the course of the world. There is no agenda in it really (certain aspects of course but there are 'right' motives in globalization too). I don't expect Bond to ignore the natural path of the planet. There can still exist 'right' ideas in a viewed 'left' trajectory. That being said, Bond can be black. I don't care. As long as it is for the reason that the black actor was the best actor. That's not a left motive, it's a good-movie motive.

Chief of SIS wrote:

Globalization is a natural event as the difficulties in international communication diminish. Some would see that as 'left' but in reality it's just the course of the world.

Extraordinary. When George Soros talks of a New World Order do you really think there's no agenda?

Chief of SIS wrote:

That being said, Bond can be black. I don't care. As long as it is for the reason that the black actor was the best actor.

But there will never be a time when a black actor is "the best actor" to play the role of 007 because a) Bond is not black, so there is no possible way that a black actor could ever hope to approximate or resemble Fleming's 007 and b) it assumes that there would be absolutely no viable, talented white actors to play 007 and therefore the producers would turn to a black actor as a last resort.