Daily Mail Commenters Are Really Angry About Idris Elba Playing James Bond

First topic message reminder :

When leaked emails from Sony appeared to show Idris Elba in the running to replace Daniel Craig as James Bond, MailOnline's commenters had a field day.
Despite 007 being played by at least eight people in the past, some of the Mail's readers threw their toys out of the pram when they heard Ian Fleming's classic spy character could be played by a black man.
The comments range from implying that black and white people are different species to equating fictional character James Bond to Nelson Mandela.
We really, really hope these are just trolls and not real people.


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/12/23/idris-elba-james-bond_n_6371644.html?utm_hp_ref=uk


And yet near every film about Jesus has been played by Americans and Europeans and not a Jew, Moses played by English and Americans, an Australian has played Noah or how about John Wayne playing Genghis Khan, all okay of course but a fictional character based on a British secret agent being played by someone who is British and they thrown their dummies out.
You cannot make it up how funny and sad some people are.

Brasidas wrote:But Veya, James Bond was created as Scottish (granted only later after the popularity of Sean Connery playing the role), so none of the other actors who played Bond should have played him, yet you do not see people objecting to these other such inaccuracies in the other films.
At the end of the day it is fictional and the fact is with every film it has moved further away from Flemmings original stories. So to equate you cannot have a Black Bond is just silly, when as seen it is fiction and has had in many of the films inaccuracies to the books. A tad late in the day really to start moaning about them.

I think you can have a black bond but it should be written that he is the new bond. (would actually improve story line anyway)

But still I think Britishness needs to be present it is part of the story that makes it distinct from the Multitude of USA secret agent film/books.

veya_victaous wrote:

Brasidas wrote:But Veya, James Bond was created as Scottish (granted only later after the popularity of Sean Connery playing the role), so none of the other actors who played Bond should have played him, yet you do not see people objecting to these other such inaccuracies in the other films.
At the end of the day it is fictional and the fact is with every film it has moved further away from Flemmings original stories. So to equate you cannot have a Black Bond is just silly, when as seen it is fiction and has had in many of the films inaccuracies to the books. A tad late in the day really to start moaning about them.

I think you can have a black bond but it should be written that he is the new bond. (would actually improve story line anyway)

But still I think Britishness needs to be present    it is part of the story that makes it distinct from the Multitude of USA secret agent film/books.

If you are going to do that Veya, this should have been done for the other Bonds after Sean Connery, being on the issue of accuracy, as they are not Scottish.
Blacks have been in this country since the conception of British let alone English came to these shores. The fact is both are conceptions and not something biological. We are born into nations and brought up in their cultures which is what makes us British and English.
So a Black person can very much be British and English

veya_victaous wrote:

Brasidas wrote:But Veya, James Bond was created as Scottish (granted only later after the popularity of Sean Connery playing the role), so none of the other actors who played Bond should have played him, yet you do not see people objecting to these other such inaccuracies in the other films.
At the end of the day it is fictional and the fact is with every film it has moved further away from Flemmings original stories. So to equate you cannot have a Black Bond is just silly, when as seen it is fiction and has had in many of the films inaccuracies to the books. A tad late in the day really to start moaning about them.

I think you can have a black bond but it should be written that he is the new bond. (would actually improve story line anyway)

But still I think Britishness needs to be present    it is part of the story that makes it distinct from the Multitude of USA secret agent film/books.

Fiction is an art, veya.  In art, anything goes.  Listen, rock 'n roll was once exclusively Elvis Presley and Bill Haley and the Comets.  WTF...a British rock band??  Blue suede shoes...and a bowler?

There's no accounting for artistic tastes.  That's why there are no lines...no box.  If a black Bond makes it...well, so did the Beatles.

Brasidas wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Brasidas wrote:But Veya, James Bond was created as Scottish (granted only later after the popularity of Sean Connery playing the role), so none of the other actors who played Bond should have played him, yet you do not see people objecting to these other such inaccuracies in the other films.
At the end of the day it is fictional and the fact is with every film it has moved further away from Flemmings original stories. So to equate you cannot have a Black Bond is just silly, when as seen it is fiction and has had in many of the films inaccuracies to the books. A tad late in the day really to start moaning about them.

I think you can have a black bond but it should be written that he is the new bond. (would actually improve story line anyway)

But still I think Britishness needs to be present    it is part of the story that makes it distinct from the Multitude of USA secret agent film/books.

If you are going to do that Veya, this should have been done for the other Bonds after Sean Connery, being on the issue of accuracy, as they are not Scottish.
Blacks have been in this country since the conception of British let alone English came to these shores. The fact is both are conceptions and not something biological. We are born into nations and brought up in their cultures which is what makes us British and English.
So a Black person can very much be British and English

they can be British but not the stereotypical British.

I don't see Connery as Bond i see Brosnan and Moore as Bond. Brosnan was the Bond of the movies when i was a kid and Moore is in the most and i think better ones.

And you make the big assumption i am not just lumping all Brits together Scots are Brits but not English. I said the Britishness needs to be present
They can be black but the better sound like they came from downton abbey

Original Quill wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Brasidas wrote:But Veya, James Bond was created as Scottish (granted only later after the popularity of Sean Connery playing the role), so none of the other actors who played Bond should have played him, yet you do not see people objecting to these other such inaccuracies in the other films.
At the end of the day it is fictional and the fact is with every film it has moved further away from Flemmings original stories. So to equate you cannot have a Black Bond is just silly, when as seen it is fiction and has had in many of the films inaccuracies to the books. A tad late in the day really to start moaning about them.

I think you can have a black bond but it should be written that he is the new bond. (would actually improve story line anyway)

But still I think Britishness needs to be present    it is part of the story that makes it distinct from the Multitude of USA secret agent film/books.

Fiction is an art, veya.  In art, anything goes.  Listen, rock 'n roll was once exclusively Elvis Presley and Bill Haley and the Comets.  WTF...a British rock band??  Blue suede shoes...and a  bowler?

There's no accounting for artistic tastes.  That's why there are no lines...no box.  If a black Bond makes it...well, so did the Beatles.

Sort of proved my point Quill
The Beatles Aren't called Elvis Presley
Blacks have already been in secret agent films, Bond is specifically British
next thing you know Bond will sound like Jay-Z. and M will be played by Beyonce. and it will be 'Bourne Bond Legacy'

Although Kayne West Would make an AWESOME bond

I think this has come to an interesting crossroads here. IF the series continues with the assumption the Bond character is the same but with a black face (as it was with Connery and Moore) then I would disagree, that would be silly. However as veya says if we are made aware this person is not the same as the last then no prob.

Eilzel wrote:I think this has come to an interesting crossroads here. IF the series continues with the assumption the Bond character is the same but with a black face (as it was with Connery and Moore) then I would disagree, that would be silly. However as veya says if we are made aware this person is not the same as the last then no prob.

Exactly

But even if the go new bond route I still think they should pick a clearly British sounding man.

"Bond, James Bond"
just wont sound right otherwise.

Eilzel wrote:I think this has come to an interesting crossroads here. IF the series continues with the assumption the Bond character is the same but with a black face (as it was with Connery and Moore) then I would disagree, that would be silly. However as veya says if we are made aware this person is not the same as the last then no prob.

Bit if you are going by silly, why would you then have an Englishman play a Scot Eilzel, which to the many Scots would be silly also, it would be like an Australian playing William Wallace with a awful accent. James Bond was created as Scottish, after he success of Sean Connery.
The whole standing point here is about accuracy to fiction. So if you allow for inaccuracies on the main character from the start, you are not in a position later to moan in the Character is played by someone who is Black English/British. I can understand such arguments for when Bond first came out as most Blacks were still way behind in equality, but the main point people are failing over here is a mistaken belief that Blacks are not British or English. The fact is English or British is nothing more than a conception, it is not something biological, but something that has both been incorporated to identify this nation and it is well know that Black people have been here since before the Anglo Saxons. Our nation is this made up of many Ethnic groups and if the point is on what ethnicity can play the part which is essentially the argument, then if Blacks can not be identified as English or British then the same would apply to many people within this country based on the sole principle of ethnic ancestry. All would then have to be identified by their ethnic ancestry group and not the one with have incorporated ourselves later. English and British is something we are raised with as a culture, not something we are born with.


This is why the whole stand point is silly here to claim someone who is English and British cannot play the part, being only that his skin is darker than the majority of other English or British people. So if people are trying to claim black people are not British then their arguments would also relegate many of citizens to not also being classed as either English, where they would have to be solely descended from the Angles, where you would be hard pressed to find. Again this is all based an absurd notion of who is English and British, it does not just mean people we identify as white.

veya_victaous wrote:

Brasidas wrote:



If you are going to do that Veya, this should have been done for the other Bonds after Sean Connery, being on the issue of accuracy, as they are not Scottish.
Blacks have been in this country since the conception of British let alone English came to these shores. The fact is both are conceptions and not something biological. We are born into nations and brought up in their cultures which is what makes us British and English.
So a Black person can very much be British and English

they can be British but not the stereotypical British.

I don't see Connery as Bond i see Brosnan and Moore as Bond.  Brosnan was the Bond of the movies when i was a kid and Moore is in the most and i think better ones.

And you make the big assumption i am not just lumping all Brits together Scots are Brits but not English. I said the Britishness needs to be present
They can be black but the better sound like they came from downton abbey

Then your stereotype view of British people Veya is outdated and backwards, being as this country has had Black British people for centuries. What you are saying which was true in the past is that Black British people could not rise to such positions because they were discriminated against in the past, all of which has now changed. Again your view is on later Bonds being better, which is just a opinion, but they are less accurate to what has been written.So all you are presenting to me is an outdated view of who we would describe someone who is English or British .
This why stereotypes or poor and do not move in time with history.
Well to sound British would mean speaking a variety of different accents, clearly your impression would be of a well spoken Englishman,, which again is something like this Black actor does do, even though that concept is very much also dated, because it relegates all other English accents.
By the way to me Sean Connery was the best Bond by any shadow of a doubt, with Daniel Craig second.

Because didge, it is one thing to accept a Welshman, Scot or Englishman are the same person (none had seriously deep accents)- but an entire change in their skin colour? That's a push- it doesn't really work.

Eilzel wrote:Because didge, it is one thing to accept a Welshman, Scot or Englishman are the same person (none had seriously deep accents)- but an entire change in their skin colour? That's a push- it doesn't really work.

Behave Eizlel, that is thus equating again that Black people are thus not acceptable as British people.
You will allow inaccuracies of accents but skin colour is a big no no, that makes no sense and is allowing one but denying another.
If the principle is accuracies you cannot pick and choose which ones if that is the bases for your issue.
The fact is each and every Bond Character could play the part with an exceptionally dark Tan, but the point is here it is equating the belief that they are not and cannot be British based on a poor belief that only whites are. Even if the character did have an accent, being that they are not of a nation, it would still be inaccurate.
This is really only skin deep here and if you are going to argue over a change to the bond character, they look all completely different and yet this did not draw any need of a story change in any of the films.
So why is that acceptable but a skin colour is not.
Sorry the reasoning behind this I find really absurd
It is like Idris has said, he is playing Bond, not a black Bond.

Brasidas wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Because didge, it is one thing to accept a Welshman, Scot or Englishman are the same person (none had seriously deep accents)- but an entire change in their skin colour? That's a push- it doesn't really work.

Behave Eizlel, that is thus equating again that Black people are thus not acceptable as British people.
You will low inaccuracies of accents but skin colour is a big no no, that makes no sense and is allowing one but denying another.
If the principle is accuracies you cannot pick and choose which ones if that is the bases for your issue.
The fact is each and every Bond Character could play the part with an exceptionally dark Tan, but the point is here it is equating the belief that they are not and cannot be British based on a poor belief that only whites are. Even if the character did have an accent, being that they are not of a nation, it would still be inaccurate.
This is really only skin deep here and if you are going to argue over a change to the bond character, they look all completely different and yet this did not draw any need of a story change in any of the films.
So why is that acceptable but a skin colour is not.
Sorry the reasoning behind this I find really absurd
It is like Idris has said, he is playing Bond, not a black Bond.

Actually it is not the same as saying black people are not acceptable as British people at all- I have no problem with any black Brit playing Bond if the series were revamped again. What I think is odd is changing the skin colour of a character already established in the current series. As said, if Bond became a code name then I'd have no problem with every Bond from here on being a black Brit. But the current character is white, it is easier to disguise an accent than a skin colour.

I firmly see anyone born on these islands as being British if they choose to be. I'm surprised you were suggest I think anything to the contrary. But for continuity purposes the current character would have to be white.

PS: check your PMs

Eilzel wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Behave Eizlel, that is thus equating again that Black people are thus not acceptable as British people.
You will low inaccuracies of accents but skin colour is a big no no, that makes no sense and is allowing one but denying another.
If the principle is accuracies you cannot pick and choose which ones if that is the bases for your issue.
The fact is each and every Bond Character could play the part with an exceptionally dark Tan, but the point is here it is equating the belief that they are not and cannot be British based on a poor belief that only whites are. Even if the character did have an accent, being that they are not of a nation, it would still be inaccurate.
This is really only skin deep here and if you are going to argue over a change to the bond character, they look all completely different and yet this did not draw any need of a story change in any of the films.
So why is that acceptable but a skin colour is not.
Sorry the reasoning behind this I find really absurd
It is like Idris has said, he is playing Bond, not a black Bond.

Actually it is not the same as saying black people are not acceptable as British people at all- I have no problem with any black Brit playing Bond if the series were revamped again. What I think is odd is changing the skin colour of a character already established in the current series. As said, if Bond became a code name then I'd have no problem with every Bond from here on being a black Brit. But the current character is white, it is easier to disguise an accent than a skin colour.

I firmly see anyone born on these islands as being British if they choose to be. I'm surprised you were suggest I think anything to the contrary. But for continuity purposes the current character would have to be white.

PS: check your PMs

But your view is equating this Eilzel, the whole point is here other people have played Bond all British just like Idris and yet all look different. You are happy to accept all the other actors based only on one fact, they are white. So the point is then on colour and of accepting people who are British.
I know you have no issue with people of different skin colours but look at the reasoning your propose.
If you accept people who look different without a story change why is it needed here for Idris?
The only reason you provide is his skin colour.
So there is no reason for the character to remain white when you allow for other changes.
The fact is the story of Bond from the book to the film has changed over time from many of the characters in the film and hence there is no valid reason to commit to keeping Bond white.
Your argument is basically you want to keep it accurate to the book but forgo just about every accuracy accept the colour of skin, based on an old preconception of who British people are.
Again Being British and English is a conception, nothing more.

Have replied to your PM

I'd have the same problem if they made him a teenager (16-19), a woman, gay (though bi would be ok) or morbidly obese to be honest- some differences are too obvious to get away with.

In a series of over 20 movies actors have to change out of necessity, but for continuities sake the change should be as little as possible.

^thanks

Eilzel wrote:I'd have the same problem if they made him a teenager (16-19), a woman, gay (though bi would be ok) or morbidly obese to be honest- some differences are too obvious to get away with.

In a series of over 20 movies actors have to change out of necessity, but for continuities sake the change should be as little as possible.

^thanks

In regards to fiction though I fail to see any difference as long as the Character played is in essence like Bond in Character which I do not feel skin colour would matter and here is the crux of the matter.
Can a Black person born and raised in England pull off such a role?
Very much so.

Of course he could, a black person can be as British as you or I. But this incarnation of Bond is white, and like it would make no sense for him to suddenly be gay or obese, nor would it make sense for him to suddenly be white.

I mean, I'm not as against this as nicko, it would just be odd.

Eilzel wrote:Of course he could, a black person can be as British as you or I. But this incarnation of Bond is white, and like it would make no sense for him to suddenly be gay or obese, nor would it make sense for him to suddenly be white.

I mean, I'm not as against this as nicko, it would just be odd.

Well in the last film the insinuation was that Bond is now bisexual.
I very much doubt that was written in the original books either but as seen the film is in vastly difference tot he books.
Again to me the Bond Character has changed so many times without ever a need of a change to the storyline of Bond himself, where people have happily accepted this.
As I say back when the story was created it would have been very much out of place based on the stereotype view held back then of British, but this is now the 21st century and views have rightly very much changed for the better.
Eilzel it is a debate and you are entitled to your views here mate, I just don't really agree with them

Just sent you another PM dude.

BOND IS BI-SEXUAL? oh god, you you rotter! I can never forgive you, sob.

nicko wrote:BOND IS BI-SEXUAL?    oh god,  you you rotter! I can never forgive you, sob.

To help restore your faith Nicko:

My faith is restored, almost.

nicko wrote:My faith is restored,   almost.

Some "Moore" is needed I guess.  

OK, going to weigh in on this again. Here we are, nearly 2015 now, talking about a character who's had so many updates through the years. Skyfall didn't portray Bond as being born in the 1920s or '30s, after all. If we can accept that Bond is one of those characters who keeps getting updated, why can't one of those updates be a change of ethnicity?

It would be one thing if it was all set in the same continuity, but does anybody really go into a Craig movie thinking that this is the exact same character Sean Connery was playing? Of course not, especially considering the weirdness of Never Say Never Again ...

I understand preferences; to me, Andrew Garfield will never be the real Spider-Man and Ben Affleck will never be the real Batman (to me that's Bale, actually), but it always seems strange to me whenever people get so upset about a character's skin color changing.

You could do what they've recently done with the Borne series.  Suddenly, not just a new actor, but a new character...same background story.  No more Matt Damen, but also no more Jason Borne.  Now it's Jeremy Renner.  The Borne Legacy.

Haha! "Double-O Eight."



I think it works

I think we can all safely say that Timothy Dalton was the WORST JB, even up against Lazenby.

I admit it took me a while to like Judi Dench as M, but when she died I cried buckets. I'm still not sold on the new Q and Moneypenny.

But Mr. Craig and Mr. Fiennes in the same film??? SWOON CITY.

I guess it just comes down to personal preferences really. All of the films have been adaptations off the novels.

I think we can all safely say that Timothy Dalton was the WORST JB, even up against Lazenby.

I admit it took me a while to like Judi Dench as M, but when she died I cried buckets. I'm still not sold on the new Q and Moneypenny.

But Mr. Craig and Mr. Fiennes in the same film??? SWOON CITY.

I guess it just comes down to personal preferences really. All of the films have been adaptations off the novels.

Brasidas wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Brasidas wrote:



If you are going to do that Veya, this should have been done for the other Bonds after Sean Connery, being on the issue of accuracy, as they are not Scottish.
Blacks have been in this country since the conception of British let alone English came to these shores. The fact is both are conceptions and not something biological. We are born into nations and brought up in their cultures which is what makes us British and English.
So a Black person can very much be British and English

they can be British but not the stereotypical British.

I don't see Connery as Bond i see Brosnan and Moore as Bond.  Brosnan was the Bond of the movies when i was a kid and Moore is in the most and i think better ones.

And you make the big assumption i am not just lumping all Brits together Scots are Brits but not English. I said the Britishness needs to be present
They can be black but the better sound like they came from downton abbey

Then your stereotype view of British people Veya is outdated and backwards, being as this country has had Black British people for centuries. What you are saying which was true in the past is that Black British people could not rise to such positions because they were discriminated against in the past, all of which has now changed. Again your view is on later Bonds being better, which is just a opinion, but they are less accurate to what has been written.So all you are presenting to me is an outdated view of who we would describe someone who is English or British .
This why stereotypes or poor and do not move in time with history.
Well to sound British would mean speaking a variety of different accents, clearly your impression would be of a well spoken Englishman,, which again is something like this Black actor does do, even though that concept is very much also dated, because it relegates all other English accents.
By the way to me Sean Connery was the best Bond by any shadow of a doubt, with Daniel Craig second.

Umm SO
Crocodile Dundee is ridiculously outdated too but it would still be wrong form him to be different
The Whole attraction to the Bond franchise over other Secret agent films and franchises is the Stereotype of Britishness than comes with it. What is the difference between Bond and Tom Clancy Films?.... it is the Britishness of Bond

I don't mind Timothy Dalton Bond they are funny and the films already had dated special effects when i watched them

the Problem with Sean Connery is that I cannot watch him and not see Sean Connery, there are other actors like that too where their face is too famous so regardless of the character they play my brains say their real name (Brad Pitt, Charlie Sheen and Jim Carey are some others)

pfft veya .....he was rubbish but The Living Daylight's had a good theme tune

I know Bond is bi in Skyfall didge, as I say above that is ok, but if suddenly was gay that would not, since it would contradict what we've seen so far from this incarnation of Bond.

^Ben, I agree a Bond could be black, in a revamped series- but we know that Craig does not follow the continuity of previous Bond movies and that up to now at least character hasn't changed. Would you think it fine if Bond suddenly became obese, or gay, or a teenager, or a dwarf in future films- with is expected to believe this is the same character as seen in Skyfall?

Cass wrote:I think we can all safely say that Timothy Dalton was the WORST JB, even up against Lazenby.

I admit it took me a while to like Judi Dench as M, but when she died I cried buckets. I'm still not sold on the new Q and Moneypenny.

But Mr. Craig and Mr. Fiennes in the same film??? SWOON CITY.

I guess it just comes down to personal preferences really. All of the films have been adaptations off the novels.

I agree...Dalton was the worst. Sorry, Tim...just my opinion. I liked Judi Dench too...that transition worked for me just fine.

Craig works cause he can play Hoagy Carmichael with an attitude. Fiennes? Too soft. I'll always remember him in that John La Carré novel/movie...The Constant Gardner. Don't get me wrong, I like a pensive, intelligent, but soft persona. It's just Fiennes cannot be a hard, tough guy.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Haha! "Double-O Eight."



I think it works

Matt Damon swears he is coming back to the Borne series.  But I liked Borne Legacy, Jeremy Renner, just fine.  And Rachael Weisz rocked my boat in The Constant Gardner. She was a bit awkward on the back of a motorcycle in Borne Legacy. Not like Cameron Diaz (Knight and Day).  

BTW, isn't Rachael married to Daniel Craig?

Eilzel wrote:I know Bond is bi in Skyfall didge, as I say above that is ok, but if suddenly was gay that would not, since it would contradict what we've seen so far from this incarnation of Bond.

^Ben, I agree a Bond could be black, in a revamped series- but we know that Craig does not follow the continuity of previous Bond movies and that up to now at least character hasn't changed. Would you think it fine if Bond suddenly became obese, or gay, or a teenager, or a dwarf in future films- with is expected to believe this is the same character as seen in Skyfall?

There really is no sound reasoning to any of this Eilzel because you are willing to move the goal posts on accuracy to suit which makes no sense. If you are going to allow for inaccuracies on many aspects of his Character to being completely different looking actors with no story line change and only say it is wrong because he is now black just to me is silly beyond belief, because again it is all down to skin colour. You can accept him with different facial features, different colour hair, different accents and yet skin colour no, it is just is a contradiction to the very point on arguing on accuracy.
I could understand your stance if it did not allow for any inaccuracies but you do.
I am not arguing for Bond to be gay or overweight, so that has no relevance here, if that comes up, then we can debate whether that would be going to far, where to me it would be as one the central facts about Bond is that he is a womanizer, of which a Black British person can play and being fat, well it hardly again goes well in being with someone who is going to fight and chase people.
The thing is this all stems from a belief around being British and white, which is now very much a thing of the past, I think it makes no difference what so ever what skin colour Bond has as long as he is played as British and Black people are British, sound British and act British.


What is central to his character is being British, Good Looking, womanizing, wit, extremely physically fit, smooth, no mercy, trained killer.
Skin colour is not a requirement for the above.
So the question is here, is the colour of his skin going to make any difference to the character of Bond, being as the actors have all looked different?

No

Do not forget that Bond is created as an Orphan, so he does not even have to be born from wealth.

So here is a question would it matter if he was played by a  half-caste actor, thus mixed ethnicity, which the Character of Bond was created as mixed ethnicity? Scottish father, Swiss mother.

But Skyfall established that he was born from wealth, a rich family with a big house in the Scottish countryside no less. Now we can presume thar Bond's parentage and further ancestry in this continuity was white British and of the wealthy society- is a black face really in keeping with that?

It is a big difference didge even if only superficial. It doesn't make sense to have a characters racial make up change and expect us to suspend disbelief in this being the same person as Craig.

Again, if the series rebooted like Batman or Spiderman or Bond in 2005 then cool have a black Bond, because I agree a black or oriental person can be as British as anyone- but not in this continuity.

Eilzel wrote:But Skyfall established that he was born from wealth, a rich family with a big house in the Scottish countryside no less. Now we can presume thar Bond's parentage and further ancestry in this continuity was white British and of the wealthy society- is a black face really in keeping with that?

It is a big difference didge even if only superficial. It doesn't make sense to have a characters racial make up change and expect us to suspend disbelief in this being the same person as Craig.

Again, if the series rebooted like Batman or Spiderman or Bond in 2005 then cool have a black Bond, because I agree a black or oriental person can be as British as anyone- but not in this continuity.

Hang on a minute.
So your say the last film is now the bases for how all the next Bond Films should be?
This is not Batman, where you make the next precedent the last film, which again would be through preference.
Sorry but now you are going off how the latest set of films has diverged from the other Bond films, to now make this the precedent, that again makes no sense Eilzel. That is your own personal view how then the films should follow. The films very much changed the moment Craig took on the role.
Sorry but you can also be Black Scottish also and again the conception of his father being Scottish and a Swiss mother was a later conception based off Sean Connery success, not something that Flemming originally even intend. Again what you are in fact claiming is that his ancestry cannot be Black, which is to me absurd. The character is an orphan, so his background could thus be from anything.

Again the central aspects of his character is being British, Good Looking, womanizing, wit, extremely physically fit, smooth, no mercy, trained killer.

Skin colour does not even come into the equation for the above to play the part.
The fact is you cannot base a view on accuracy from the books whilst ignoring other inaccuracies, that is a complete contradiction using accuracy as a bases for an argument.
The fact is all the actors have been very different in many aspects which did not require a story line change and neither should it do so for the only reason his skin colour is darker.

You misunderstand; I'm saying that in THIS CONTINUITY of Bond, the race of the character shouldn't change. It is unrealistic that a man whose parents were certainly white and grandparents (based on the racial make up of Craig) would be black in the next film. It is an established fact.

No I didn't say all next Bond films. This is what you don't seem to get. If they started over in 2020 (for example) then sure have a black James Bond. But if the film after Craig's last is not a reboot then it shouldn't be.

Eilzel wrote:You misunderstand; I'm saying that in THIS CONTINUITY of Bond, the race of the character shouldn't change. It is unrealistic that a man whose parents were certainly white and grandparents (based on the racial make up of Craig) would be black in the next film. It is an established fact.

No I didn't say all next Bond films. This is what you don't seem to get. If they started over in 2020 (for example) then sure have a black James Bond. But if the film after Craig's last is not a reboot then it shouldn't be.

But Eilzel, race is a man made conception, not something biological.
The fact is by doing this we are saying there is something different to being white British and Black British as if they are different races, which is one of the fundamental problems Black people face today, because they are not seen as the British race because of their ethnicity and that they have darker skin, which is completely wrong. To me this would be of great benefit to dismiss such myths in this country. The fact is being English and British are conceptions later adapted to identify a nation, which is not all white inclusive.
So the race of Bond is not changing, as one never existed, what did exist is a nationality of British and being the fact we only become British by growing up within a society and learning its cultures, then any person who is British can play the part.

The fact is this is again fiction, where the bases for the story can change, as it did for the character after the success of Sean Connery, it was a later adaption to the story where his ancestry was introduced of a Swiss Mother and Scottish father , which again in both cases can be black parents.
The fact is if you are going to be picky over the character where he has a string Scottish accent to the next character having a strong English actor has thus allowed a complete change to the character.

Again the central aspects of his character is being British, Good Looking, womanizing, wit, extremely physically fit, smooth, no mercy, trained killer.

It does not matter if you are white or Black British to be the above being as we have had an Australian, an Irishman, an Englishman, and a Welshman, play the part of a Character who was created as Scottish.

I knew you'd make a deal of the race issue haha.

Ok, I agree English and British are man made constructs. And I don't think you have to be white to be either- you can have whatever skin colour and still be British.

But this incarnation of Bond, has white skin. And even you cannot deny that skin colour is a noticeable difference between one person and another. In reality you cannot be white one day and black the next. Now we are talking about fiction, but we still need to be able to suspend our disbelief for 2 hours or so- and a change in skin colour is too noticeable for us to just accept that an shrug our shoulders- the fact it is a topic of debate says as much.

So forget words like race- I am not saying skin colour defines what makes us British, not by a million miles; but a character who, fictional or not, is white in THIS CONTINUITY should remain white.

The same as a character who is male should remain male or a character who is a dwarf should remain a dwarf. There is no reason to change it unless we are clearly breaking the continuity, in which case anything goes.

Eilzel wrote:I knew you'd make a deal of the race issue haha.

Ok, I agree English and British are man made constructs. And I don't think you have to be white to be either- you can have whatever skin colour and still be British.

But this incarnation of Bond, has white skin. And even you cannot deny that skin colour is a noticeable difference between one person and another. In reality you cannot be white one day and black the next. Now we are talking about fiction, but we still need to be able to suspend our disbelief for 2 hours or so- and a change in skin colour is too noticeable for us to just accept that an shrug our shoulders- the fact it is a topic of debate says as much.

So forget words like race- I am not saying skin colour defines what makes us British, not by a million miles; but a character who, fictional or not, is white in THIS CONTINUITY should remain white.

The same as a character who is male should remain male or a character who is a dwarf should remain a dwarf. There is no reason to change it unless we are clearly breaking the continuity, in which case anything goes.

It does not matter if the previous incantation of Bond had white skin though Eilzel if you forgo many other inaccuracies, as like I said, the part of Bond changed from someone who was Scottish to someone who is English. Now to many people not a small difference, but to Scottish and English people it is massive.
It is like I said, would you play the part of Edward I with Sean Connery?
Of course not, but this is what you are essentially making allowances for here, but not so for someone Black British, which again is nothing short of a contradiction.

The minute they cast Roger Moore, then you open up the door to changes being acceptable and using your logic you cannot help but notice that Roger Moor is completely different looking to Sean Connery, but now speaks in an English accent and not a Scottish accent. Do you see how your own logic can work against you here? Sorry mate, again I can understand your stance if it was on all accuracies, but you allow for inaccuracies and off even the same logic you propose to a Bond played by someone Black British.
So using your logic a fictional Character who is Scottish, should remain Scottish and even looking familiar to the last character, all of which just did not happen, in fact they all looked completely different.
Thus the continuity of the James Bond Character should remain Scottish and not what something we clas as quintessentially English.

If you have allowed for this, then you have no grounds against having a change to the skin colour of the character.
Sorry you have no leg to stand on this using your own logic.

Bond IS white get over it, and don't you think this subject has been done to death?lets all agree to disagree and call it a day!

nicko wrote:Bond IS white   get over it,  and don't you think this subject has been done to death?lets all agree to disagree and call it a day!

Look, if you do not mind adults are debating, you have made the same lame redundant point without even debating each time.
We are all enjoying this debate, which many people never agree on things, which is the point of the debate.
Nobody is asking that you have to read this are they?
So unless you have something to counter the views, may I ask politely that you do not spoil the debate?


Thank you

There is no "debate" as you call it, you stick to one theme , every one else thinks your wrong. But you wont except it. as always you have to beat the subject to death to prove you are right.

nicko wrote:There is no "debate" as you call it,  you stick to one theme , every one else thinks your wrong. But you wont except it. as always you have to beat the subject to death to prove you are right.

Really? So Ben, Quill etc think I am wrong when they have been agreeing with me? It seems to me it is very much divided with people on this, proving again you see only what you want to see where nobody is forcing you to debate.
Again others are interested in debate, you may not agree with my views, that is your choice and I am not asking you to change them, hence why others are interested in debating this.
As always you have to act like a 2 year old because you want your point to be right.

Stop trying to deny people the enjoyment of debate, just because you do not agree with my views.

Thank you

Haha, yeah the split here is about 50/50, or maybe more agreeing with didge.

Again though for me the reason is what is noticeable. Two different white actors is easily done without the need for a continuity break since none of the actors had a particularly strong accent anyway. But a black man replacing a white man in the same continuity? That is noticeable didge you can't deny it- and too noticeable to expect people to accept this Bond as the same character as the previous one.

Eilzel wrote:Haha, yeah the split here is about 50/50, or maybe more agreeing with didge.

Again though for me the reason is what is noticeable. Two different white actors is easily done without the need for a continuity break since none of the actors had a particularly strong accent anyway. But a black man replacing a white man in the same continuity? That is noticeable didge you can't deny it- and too noticeable to expect people to accept this Bond as the same character as the previous one.

But your reasoning now Eilzel is based on what is noticeable, which is conjecture based on the view of each person.
Again to the people of these British Isles it is blatantly noticeable that the actor Sean Connery has gone from looking and sounding Scottish to something completely different and being English in Roger Moore, much taller of a different build and looks altogether.
Again the bases for your reasoning here is on continuity, which never happened, where one actor has a strong Scottish accent to then to Roger Moore with what we class as Quintessentially English accent.
I am not sure you can not say that is not noticeable based off the view point on accuracy to the books, being as everyone in this country would certainly notice.
Again the characters have changed and if you allow for noticeable change, which has happened, then to me there is no reasoning behind a claim to no skin colour.
So again your reasoning contradicts.


Nicko tends to see only what he wants to see, but like me I know you are enjoying the debate Eilzel.

Anyway Catch you later Eilzel.

Eilzel wrote:I think this has come to an interesting crossroads here. IF the series continues with the assumption the Bond character is the same but with a black face (as it was with Connery and Moore) then I would disagree, that would be silly. However as veya says if we are made aware this person is not the same as the last then no prob.

Jeez! I always thought we were supposed to know the characters were different?
Hahaa well that proves my point then:

James Bond films are for the stupid!

Ps: perhaps they should merge Eastenders with James Bind films seeing as the belief has to be suspended in equal amounts for the watching of both pieces of crap?

I am enjoying it didge, as I've said my feelings on this aren't particularly strong in any case. I sometimes wonder why nicko posts on debating forums since he hardly ever want to 'debate' opinions anyway lol

Back on topic, I'm sorry but Connery, although he does have an accent, it is hardly the strongest (he's no Billy Connolly haha). And still, an accent is easier to accept in continuity than a whole change of skin colour.

^Eds, the Bond films are quality, and would be with Elba I don't doubt- you have no taste girl- EE on the otherhand...

For fcuk sake whats the good of debating when didge is always "right" no matter what argument you put over he will always say he knows best, he's starting to do it with you or haven't you noticed.