[QuickTidal]

McLovin, on 15 November 2012 - 06:33 PM, said:

He needs two shots to get 00 status.

...and McLovin wins the thread.

[Shinrei]

I am honestly fascinated by the difference in opinion on this thread.

I guess I've just never seen "whiteness" as being an essential characteristic of Bond.

Now, if they suggested that they make James Bond a homosexual "womaninizer", then I suppose I would object, because that I feel would be a genuine break from an essential Bond characteristic of 007 as a womanizer.


Of course, they could make Bond a hot female womanizer, but then I'd probably have to look for the DVD in another part of the store....

This post has been edited by Shinrei: 16 November 2012 - 05:37 AM

[Cougar]

I've no idea what him being able to play Stringer Bell has to do with his ability to play Bond - seems an odd comment. Luther is a prime example of why Elba isn't Bond - Luther is firmly working/lower middle class, it shows in the way he moves and speaks, not just the accent, but what he says and how he says it. There are very few actors who can totally change themselves for each role, Elba really doesn't seem to be one of them; rather, there is a great deal of himself in all his characters.

[Morgoth]

In Luther yes, but I'd argue that his Stringer Bell character is very different from Luther. Which goes to show, I think, that he's got the range to pull off a more upper class persona.

At the same time, Flemming wrote Bond as a cold hearted, vicious brute. Sure, he could be charming and a little suave when he wanted to, but at heart he was a brute. Craig pulls that off well, and I think Elba could do the same.

[Obdigore]

I'm shocked that people are shocked about people saying 'bond has to be white'. Don't you remember the all the whining when people found out Heimdall was going to be a black guy? Does anyone think he wasn't a great Heimdall now that you have seen the movie?

[Durhang]

A lot of controversy, but still more civil than some of the conversations when you get two sides arguing over Craig. More than a few people I've talked to refuse to acknowledge Craig because his more violent persona is somehow too generic-action-flicky and less 'authentic Bond film.' Though, I also recall other people creating this same blind spot for Dalton. In the end it will come down to tone and direction. Anything where the words black and Bond are next to each other is already headed in the wrong direction, race should never enter into it. I would love to see Elba play Bond in the latest Bond movie, but not Elba playing 'the black Bond in that black Bond movie.' Bond should simply be Bond: smooth, charming, mysterious, interesting, entertaining, and oh so deadly. It should be Elba being so overwhelmingly Bond (or at least whatever different direction it takes so engaging) that the masses only then remember (if they must) ten minutes outside the theatre that Bond happened to have a different skin colour. That being said, I'd love to see what a Nolan directed Bond trilogy would be. But only after Kevin McKidd plays 006 in a Craig film, or some other anti-Bond villain. A face off that needs to happen. (After seeing Bunraku, man can Lucius Vorenus rock a pink suit.) Whether it is an ethnic diverse casting choice or simply diverging from source material, so long as it is seamless within experience, that is all that matters for me.

This post has been edited by Durhang: 16 November 2012 - 08:52 AM

[Morgoth]

Obdigore, on 16 November 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

I'm shocked that people are shocked about people saying 'bond has to be white'. Don't you remember the all the whining when people found out Heimdall was going to be a black guy? Does anyone think he wasn't a great Heimdall now that you have seen the movie?

Incidently also played by Idris Elba if I'm not mistaken.

[Cougar]

I thought he was a shite Heimdall, although it hardly involved what one would traditionally call 'acting'. Nevertheless, I think he'd be an awful choice for Bond. I just don't think I'd believe in him as the character. Maybe it's because I've got a more intimate knowledge of English society and class than most of you, maybe you just don't/can't see what I see. Perhaps, on the flip side, it's better to get the opinions of non-Brits since most of the audience is international and you're more removed from the cultural assumptions of the British. I dunno. I know what Bond is and he isn't Idris Elba. For the same reason I wouldn't cast Russell Crowe as Bond - too brutish, too bulky, doesn't have the lines to pull off the suit, - I'd reject Elba physcially for the role. However, I'd also reject him on the grounds that I just don't believe from a socio-cultural perspective that someone like Elba could be the character, I'm not sure that any amount of acting quality will make that work. Luther was written for him, Stringer Bell was a character that he was chosen to play without having been played by other actors and written about in million selling books for years. Totally different scenario.

[Morgoth]

Cougar, on 16 November 2012 - 10:43 AM, said:

I thought he was a shite Heimdall, although it hardly involved what one would traditionally call 'acting'. Nevertheless, I think he'd be an awful choice for Bond. I just don't think I'd believe in him as the character. Maybe it's because I've got a more intimate knowledge of English society and class than most of you, maybe you just don't/can't see what I see. Perhaps, on the flip side, it's better to get the opinions of non-Brits since most of the audience is international and you're more removed from the cultural assumptions of the British. I dunno. I know what Bond is and he isn't Idris Elba. For the same reason I wouldn't cast Russell Crowe as Bond - too brutish, too bulky, doesn't have the lines to pull off the suit, - I'd reject Elba physcially for the role. However, I'd also reject him on the grounds that I just don't believe from a socio-cultural perspective that someone like Elba could be the character, I'm not sure that any amount of acting quality will make that work. Luther was written for him, Stringer Bell was a character that he was chosen to play without having been played by other actors and written about in million selling books for years. Totally different scenario.

Fair enough. There's probably quite a few nuances tied to English culture that would pass me by. In my mind, Elba would make a great Bond, but I understand there's clearly quite a lot of stuff that I'm simply not noticing.

I didn't find Heimdal particularly impressive, but that's mainly because the character, as most characters in that movie, were shit.

[Obdigore]

Cougar, on 16 November 2012 - 10:43 AM, said:

I thought he was a shite Heimdall, although it hardly involved what one would traditionally call 'acting'. Nevertheless, I think he'd be an awful choice for Bond. I just don't think I'd believe in him as the character. Maybe it's because I've got a more intimate knowledge of English society and class than most of you, maybe you just don't/can't see what I see. Perhaps, on the flip side, it's better to get the opinions of non-Brits since most of the audience is international and you're more removed from the cultural assumptions of the British. I dunno. I know what Bond is and he isn't Idris Elba. For the same reason I wouldn't cast Russell Crowe as Bond - too brutish, too bulky, doesn't have the lines to pull off the suit, - I'd reject Elba physcially for the role. However, I'd also reject him on the grounds that I just don't believe from a socio-cultural perspective that someone like Elba could be the character, I'm not sure that any amount of acting quality will make that work. Luther was written for him, Stringer Bell was a character that he was chosen to play without having been played by other actors and written about in million selling books for years. Totally different scenario.

Why was he a shit Heimdall?

[amphibian]

Cougar, on 16 November 2012 - 07:55 AM, said:

I've no idea what him being able to play Stringer Bell has to do with his ability to play Bond - seems an odd comment.

Who is Stringer Bell? A kid who grew up in the worst regions of Baltimore, selling drugs and slowly rising in the ranks of a gang until he was the co-leader/brains behind the operation. Elba made Stringer the third most dignified character on the show (Daniels and Lester Freamon being the two tops) and had him flipping back and forth between brutal Baltimore thug and surprisingly dignified pure businessman - while being British.

That was a terrific acting job. Elba made Stringer an enormously charismatic character and absolutely ran with the great writing that gave him complex motivations for his actions and thoughts. I completely fail to see how Elba would fumble a character that's basically the same idea bumped up a socio-economic class or two, as you have it.

[Cougar]

He was a shit Heimdall because it was virtually a non-acting role. He was like a piece of wood, although I think I'd be inclined to blame the directors and writers for that more than DJ Big Dris.

I'll say it for amphibian in a different form. Just because he has the ability to play one thing that is a departure from his real self doesn't mean he could pull off another. Is he a good actor - yes; was he good as Stringer Bell, a charcter for whom he made up the persona with little or no expectation from the audience, yes; could he pull off Bond, I doubt it. If you can't see it then fine, but the comparision between one role and the other only serves to show that he's a good actor, it doesn't show he has 'range' or the ability do another. I also find your equation of the similarities between James Bond and Stringer Bell to be rather difficult to sustain if you look beyond generalisation. What is more Stringer Bell was a blank canvas when he took the role, albeit with some direction from the script etc, Bond is not a blank canvas, he's a well formed, much loved character who has some immutable qualities that I do not think Elba would pull off.

[amphibian]

What are the immutable qualities of James Bond?

- He's a British secret agent/spy/murderer.

- He's often charming, particularly so with women.

- He breaks things, shoots people, drives cool vehicles, blows stuff up and ruins world-threatening plots by super-villains.

That's it. You're elevating all these other traits into "immutable qualities" when they're not and never have been.

[Abyss]

Shinrei, on 16 November 2012 - 05:36 AM, said:

I am honestly fascinated by the difference in opinion on this thread.

I guess I've just never seen "whiteness" as being an essential characteristic of Bond.

Now, if they suggested that they make James Bond a homosexual "womaninizer", then I suppose I would object, because that I feel would be a genuine break from an essential Bond characteristic of 007 as a womanizer.

Of course, they could make Bond a hot female womanizer, but then I'd probably have to look for the DVD in another part of the store....

So he has to be British, he has to be mid-class/uppity, he has to be heterosexual, but he doesn't have to be white and he's allowed to have a gadgety cyborg-hand.

Now which of those things will cause studio execs to get hives....

Obdigore, on 16 November 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

I'm shocked that people are shocked about people saying 'bond has to be white'. Don't you remember the all the whining when people found out Heimdall was going to be a black guy? Does anyone think he wasn't a great Heimdall now that you have seen the movie?

I'm on the 'his skin colour didn't matter' side of that because he didn't do all that much and fundamentally no one cares that much about Heimdall. Or Miss Moneypenny. Or Nick Fury. Hell, there were people who lost their minds when ST:Voyager intro'd a black Vulcan but ultimately the vast majority didn't care.

There is a difference between making Bond, or Superman, or Thor, vastly different from how they have been for decades and messing with the supporting cast. I defy anyone to find me someone who went out for Halloween dressed as Heimdall. Or Miss Moneypenny. And if they did, it was because their significant other went as Thor or Bond.

[worry]

Yah, I'm trying and failing to think of a recurring character who requires less range to play than James Bond. Austin Powers runs a more thorough emotional gamut. Godzilla, maybe.

[Shinrei]

PERFECT!

http://www.cracked.c...t-spy-ever.html

[Gnaw]

Jade-Green Pig-Hog Swine-Beast, on 14 November 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:

I think that skin colour is quite a defining feature. You suggest that having Bourne be a black man is no different to Bond but, to me, Bourne isn't a black man either. Nor is John McLain or Rambo. It significantly changes the character's persona. Imagine if one of Jason Bourne's passports had a picture of a black man because they were essentially the same people.

For the record, I don't think that a character such as Shaft, for example, or, say, Pulp Fiction's Marsellus Wallace should be played by white people either.

As I say, don't get me wrong -- I think the concept is good and it would work for a similar type of character/role but unless James Bond is genuinely turned into a position/rank, Bond the person is and always has been a white man, the same as me. I certainly don't expect to wake up tomorrow and discover that I've turned black over night!

This is where I stop reading the thread.

There is nothing in "James Bond" the character that forces any particular characteristics except 'violence' 'shrewdness' and 'luck' (both good and bad). Maybe one could make a case that a female Bond wouldn't be "Bond", but that is only one I'd even attempt to defend. And that is probably more to do with the 'violence' part of the "Bond" character than genitalia. Ref: BG's Starbuck. The howls of protest went away rather quickly. The actor makes the role. Or it's simply the wrong actor. *shrug*

I've never watched The Wire, so not familiar with the actor. I would have no trouble visualizing Lennie James as 'Bond' though.

Now a female Doctor is long past due.

And the idiot who compared bond with actual real people? You really need to learn the definition of the word "fiction".

[Cougar]

Gnaw, I'll get the modding out of the way first. Don't call people idiots. I know idiot is a fairly mild insult, but it inevitably gets out of hand.<br>It is aways dissapointing when someone makes a point whilst simultaneously making it clear they are leaving the thread. It shows you have no confidence in your ability to argue, but it also seems like you are sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming 'I'm not listening la la la ...'.<br>That said, I guess I'm wasting my time here, since Gnaw has stopped reading the thread.

[worry]

You should also continue reading threads after you disagree with somebody just in case, you know, multiple people have already made the same counter-arguments you're trying to make. Just tossing out that hypothetical.

[Cougar]

Worry, I can't work out which post you are adressing here. I can't work out what you are trying to say - how can one gain any benefit from continuing to read previous posts that hasn't already be gained? Perhaps you could clarify for me.
I wouldn't let the same point being made several times piss you off though, in every thread we're guilty of that!