One thing no one will admit, but that history tells us is that powerful black men make certain types of people uncomfortable. Elba does have a commanding, power presence and yes he is black, and at times that might work against him in terms of casting. Generally, certain types of people will not support movies nor actors who make them feel uncomfortable or less than powerful since they've grown accustomed to having their own likeness automatically placed in a position of power as a norm in popular entertainment.
This is irrelevant to the discussion on this forum (irrespective of whether it may or may not have any pertinence outside this thread). No one is saying that Elba cannot or should not play a powerful spy. They are simply saying that he should not play one specific character with an established ethnicity and heritage: James Bond.
So to ask again, what fundamental part of Bond do we lose with a black actor?
I'll garner a guess. Certain types of pasty white guys wouldn't be able to imagine themselves as Bond. Kills all the vicarious pleasure for them.
Idris is hot -- he can do the job and probably bring something new to the character.
My 2-cents as a woman. I dislike the classic Bond. He's a freakin' dinosaur. When Daniel Craig took the role and Bond became more of a passionate guy who actually showed loving feelings for his female lead, had some depth as a person, I gave the franchise a chance.
Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-
The Bond franchise needs to stay relevent. To stay relevent the producers need to think outside the box. Daniel Craig as Bond wasn't exactly a popular choice among Bond aficionados. I mean, a blond Bond!!?? How can there be a blond Bond???
Ten years ago, I never would have thought that there would be a Black man in the White House who wasn't there to perform, or wasn't a civil rights leader meeting with the prez. Cynics will argue that Barack Obama isn't really Black. It's true that the prez is of biracial descent. However, most African Americans have white or Native American Indian ancestors. I think that you can state that Barack Obama is, indeed, Black. The prez looks more like Denzel Washington than Brad Pitt. The good thing about Barack Obama's election is this: In the near future there will be a undisputable Black person as president...like Mass. governor, Deval Patrick.
I haven't read this whole thread because I was out doing stuff while this argument was growing, but I just want to remind everybody not to be political and/or a racist jerk.
I haven't read this whole thread because I was out doing stuff while this argument was growing, but I just want to remind everybody not to be political and/or a racist jerk.
This has been a public service announcement.
Thank you for your cooperation.
So you don't want me to post at all, then?
Freakin' Democrat!
If you really like it you can have the rights
It could make a million for you overnight
This thread no longer has anything to do with James Bond.
Sure, it does. Think of the decades upon decades Black people and other racial minorities having paid for their movie tickets and had to relate to white heroes. White male heroes. (Alien was a seachange for me as a female.)
This says a lot about the (hopefully eroding) white male sense of superioty. And I'm not criticizing anyone. A couple of centuries of Western society favoring white males has done it to them through no fault of their own. It's so ingrained in every aspect of society they don't realize they possess a sense of superiority over non-whites and women.
Bond epitomizes this centuries-old conditioning at every level. He's an archetype of this conditioning. And, when someone messes with it, it makes some white males uncomforatble without even being cognizant of why.
(Now the fur should fly.)
Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-
As writers, I think it's important to recognize the distinction.
As writers I think it's important to respect what the original writer intended for his character. You know, that guy called Ian Fleming? For five decades they've stayed true to Fleming's Anglo Bond because they realize that his Anglo nature is central to his character.
Fleming himself on creating the Bond character's name and identity (his named was borrowed from an author):
"It struck me that this brief, unromantic, Anglo-Saxon and yet very masculine name was just what I needed, and so a second James Bond was born".
Inspirations for Bond's character included Fleming himself, his brother, and various people he knew when he was in Naval Intelligence. He wrote Bond's father as a Scot (Andrew Bond), his mother as a Swiss named Monique Delacroix (presumably from one of the French cantons).
Again, Bond is not just anyone. I wouldn't care if they rebooted Die Hard or Lethal Weapon with blacks playing McLane and Riggs, as they're just action heroes who kill people. But certain action heroes have specific cultural realities associated with them, like Bond, Zatoichi, Shaft, and Conan the Barbarian. A huge part of Bond's identity is his Anglo background, just as Zatoichi can only be Japanese, Shaft can only be black, and Conan can only be a central/Eastern European.
Sure, it does. Think of the decades upon decades Black people and other racial minorities having paid for their movie tickets and had to relate to white heroes. White male heroes. (Alien was a seachange for me as a female.)
This says a lot about the (hopefully eroding) white male sense of superioty. And I'm not criticizing anyone. A couple of centuries of Western society favoring white males has done it to them through no fault of their own. It's so ingrained in every aspect of society they don't realize they possess a sense of superiority over non-whites and women.
Bond epitomizes this centuries-old conditioning at every level. He's an archetype of this conditioning. And, when someone messes with it, it makes some white males uncomforatble without even being cognizant of why.
(Now the fur should fly.)
No one said they didn't feel comfortable with a black male hero. I'm very much in favour of it, there should be more options. But what is the point of taking over pre-existing characters when the franchise is doing so well with the character as it currently is?
No one said they didn't feel comfortable with a black male hero. I'm very much in favour of it, there should be more options. But what is the point of taking over pre-existing characters when the franchise is doing so well with the character as it currently is?
Precisely.
Many posters in this thread are arguing against a position that no one is taking.
No one is stating that Idris Elba cannot play a secret agent. He can be an MI6 agent, a double-0, whatever.
Give him some 007-like attributes... or don't.
Make him suave... or don't.
If there are aspects of the 007 character that some people consider unmodern, and therefore unappealing, (though for others, it is the very unmodernity of the 007 character that is a central part of his charm,) make Elba's character different in those respects.
Heck, make a "better" secret agent. Make a more contemporary-seeming secret agent. He might start a franchise that will be more popular than Bond. One could even envision a crossover, Marvel style, spy vs. spy who have to team up.
Nowhere is it said that there is room for only one secret-agent character in film. There have been many, and there will be many more.
Why change one, single, specific character with an established identity, rather than creating a new and, for some people, possibly better character?
Again, DC created a black Green Lantern in John Stewart, rather than altering Hal Jordan to make him black. Everyone was happy -- the fans of the original character, and those who preferred the new Green Lantern. They complemented each other perfectly well.
Comment