Bond, James Bond

Fumbluff said:

Tom Hardy is not a big dude

Do you know what, I've just googled how tall he is. He is shorter than me I concede defeat on the matter

I was sold a pup from Bronson, Batman and the revenant. He looks massive in them 

Henry Irving said:

Dave2l said:

It's now just rather outdated and probably needs to end soon.

It's always best to know when to stop. 

Then the old films can just be reflected on and still be an enjoyment to watch.

It's getting too much.

It's now just some repetitive shit.

Don't get this 

It's always been repetitive, that's it's strength.

It's one of, if not THE, most successful and longest running franchises ever.

The films and Bonds reflect the eras they come from.

The Bourne films changed Bond imho from the slightly camp tonque in cheek version back to the hard nosed brutal cold blooded Bond of the books but with travelogues thrown in.

The films have been good or indifferent but it's always a Bond movie.

I'll be going to see this one at the pictures when it comes out.

My sister works for Universal and saw the film a while ago. She said it’s brilliant.

Henry Irving said:

Dave2l said:

It's now just rather outdated and probably needs to end soon.

It's always best to know when to stop. 

Then the old films can just be reflected on and still be an enjoyment to watch.

It's getting too much.

It's now just some repetitive shit.

Don't get this 

It's always been repetitive, that's it's strength.

It's one of, if not THE, most successful and longest running franchises ever.

The films and Bonds reflect the eras they come from.

The Bourne films changed Bond imho from the slightly camp tonque in cheek version back to the hard nosed brutal cold blooded Bond of the books but with travelogues thrown in.

The films have been good or indifferent but it's always a Bond movie.

I'll be going to see this one at the pictures when it comes out.

On the money post.

Ross said:

I’d love a young Bond. Tom Holland maybe, showing how he became an agent.

If they reboot the whole thing again then that's not an awful idea but I like the current supporting actors especially Ralph Feinnes, Naomie Harris and Rory Kinnear (although I always think back to him snagging a pig in black mirror) 

Henry Irving said:

Dave2l said:

It's now just rather outdated and probably needs to end soon.

It's always best to know when to stop. 

Then the old films can just be reflected on and still be an enjoyment to watch.

It's getting too much.

It's now just some repetitive shit.

Don't get this 

It's always been repetitive, that's it's strength.

It's one of, if not THE, most successful and longest running franchises ever.

The films and Bonds reflect the eras they come from.

The Bourne films changed Bond imho from the slightly camp tonque in cheek version back to the hard nosed brutal cold blooded Bond of the books but with travelogues thrown in.

The films have been good or indifferent but it's always a Bond movie.

I'll be going to see this one at the pictures when it comes out.

You know you're old when you refer to it as going to "the pictures".

Jokes aside though, agree with everything you've said.

KBslittlesis said:

So they’re going from wooden and one dimensional to wooden and one dimensional.

Bit of eye candy for the ladies to balance up on all the eye candy for the men.

I just hope there’s some decent action and one liners as I’m running out of patience with it tbh.

Hardy was a bit Bond like in Inception - suave, well-spoken and an action hero (shooting people on skis was like a Bond audition). That performance alongside The Revenant, Locke and Taboo, do a good job of countering that ‘one dimensional’ claim. 

One thing I’ve noticed in the Daniel Craig Bond films and possibly before ? Is that the term when addressing JB as Commander Bond has been dropped or at least I havnt noticed it. Watching the new films trailer I see that at least once it was used which I think is a good thing. Bonds Royal Navy background is an important facet of the character.

DA9 said:

Gillis said:

DA9 said:

Watch Taboo and revenant and then claim he can’t act, and as Ronnie Kray in Legend....outstanding 

And whilst I’m here, James Bond should never be anything but a white actor, whole back story would be ruined otherwise, Idris Elba is a fantastic actor, and taken in isolation would suit it, but, there is a whole lot more to consider than just acting, the whole (as mentioned) back story of a white Scottish father and white Swiss mother, plus the Fleming original book illustrations, based on a white character.

Using the same logic, shaft and othello could be played by white actors, equally ridiculous and wrong in my view.

I'm not saying Bond shouldn't always be portrayed by a white actor, but equally it seems a bit silly to get hung up on 'back story' when the bloke's been the same age for 60 years and had six different faces.

Take the back story away it ruins the whole franchise imo, like restarting batman or superman whose parents didn’t get murdered or their planet didn’t blow up
yes, it’s suspension of belief, but it’s important to who he is and his background 

Bond’s backstory is not what defines him. It’s hardly even touched in the the vast majority of Bond movies so I don’t see why it’s relevant. I certainly don’t think it should be used as an excuse to defy a black actor from playing the role. I’m not even sure why a Swiss and Scottish couple can’t be black anyway. Further still, why is that backstory not allowed to be updated, even if you can’t buy the idea that Scottish and Swiss people can be black? 

JiMMy 85 said:

DA9 said:

Gillis said:

DA9 said:

Watch Taboo and revenant and then claim he can’t act, and as Ronnie Kray in Legend....outstanding 

And whilst I’m here, James Bond should never be anything but a white actor, whole back story would be ruined otherwise, Idris Elba is a fantastic actor, and taken in isolation would suit it, but, there is a whole lot more to consider than just acting, the whole (as mentioned) back story of a white Scottish father and white Swiss mother, plus the Fleming original book illustrations, based on a white character.

Using the same logic, shaft and othello could be played by white actors, equally ridiculous and wrong in my view.

I'm not saying Bond shouldn't always be portrayed by a white actor, but equally it seems a bit silly to get hung up on 'back story' when the bloke's been the same age for 60 years and had six different faces.

Take the back story away it ruins the whole franchise imo, like restarting batman or superman whose parents didn’t get murdered or their planet didn’t blow up
yes, it’s suspension of belief, but it’s important to who he is and his background 

Bond’s backstory is not what defines him. It’s hardly even touched in the the vast majority of Bond movies so I don’t see why it’s relevant. I certainly don’t think it should be used as an excuse to defy a black actor from playing the role. I’m not even sure why a Swiss and Scottish couple can’t be black anyway. Further still, why is that backstory not allowed to be updated, even if you can’t buy the idea that Scottish and Swiss people can be black? 

Plenty of other elements have been updated - Moneypenny is now black, and a field agent. Is her character ‘ruined’? Was it a bad thing when M was played by a woman? 

We’ve been over this before, possibly in this thread, but the Shaft comparison is a really good way of highlighting how you’ve missed the point; Shaft is defined by being African-American. That’s the very purpose of the black exploitation movie. More so, the character is a hero for people of the same background in a world where action heroes are unnecessarily white. As for Othello, one of the key themes is racism. It’s specifically about a Moorish character, that’s the very purpose of the story. 

You cannot claim Bond movies serve the same purpose. It’s isn’t about race. Class, yes but not at all race. Bond is a womanising, borderline alcoholic, posh, slick, gun-toting, suave, world-saving British secret agent. To say he can’t be black is... well it’s not good. 

I never said it defined him, I said it’s important to his background/back story.
No issue with Moneypenny being black, or M being female.
I think your stretching it by saying that his parents could have been black, maybe in recent history it’s more of a possibility, but highly unlikely or even a serious consideration for Fleming when he wrote the original books and illustrations, which is my point, Bond in his eyes was clearly white, British upper class, and all of the privileges that went with that, to now make his character Black, for me, is box ticking, virtual signalling woke nonsense.
By all means introduce more BAME and LGBTQ+  characters into the Bond universe to represent a changing/changed Britain since his inception, but Bond is Bond is Bond.

DA9 said:

JiMMy 85 said:

DA9 said:

Gillis said:

DA9 said:

Watch Taboo and revenant and then claim he can’t act, and as Ronnie Kray in Legend....outstanding 

And whilst I’m here, James Bond should never be anything but a white actor, whole back story would be ruined otherwise, Idris Elba is a fantastic actor, and taken in isolation would suit it, but, there is a whole lot more to consider than just acting, the whole (as mentioned) back story of a white Scottish father and white Swiss mother, plus the Fleming original book illustrations, based on a white character.

Using the same logic, shaft and othello could be played by white actors, equally ridiculous and wrong in my view.

I'm not saying Bond shouldn't always be portrayed by a white actor, but equally it seems a bit silly to get hung up on 'back story' when the bloke's been the same age for 60 years and had six different faces.

Take the back story away it ruins the whole franchise imo, like restarting batman or superman whose parents didn’t get murdered or their planet didn’t blow up
yes, it’s suspension of belief, but it’s important to who he is and his background 

Bond’s backstory is not what defines him. It’s hardly even touched in the the vast majority of Bond movies so I don’t see why it’s relevant. I certainly don’t think it should be used as an excuse to defy a black actor from playing the role. I’m not even sure why a Swiss and Scottish couple can’t be black anyway. Further still, why is that backstory not allowed to be updated, even if you can’t buy the idea that Scottish and Swiss people can be black? 

Plenty of other elements have been updated - Moneypenny is now black, and a field agent. Is her character ‘ruined’? Was it a bad thing when M was played by a woman? 

We’ve been over this before, possibly in this thread, but the Shaft comparison is a really good way of highlighting how you’ve missed the point; Shaft is defined by being African-American. That’s the very purpose of the black exploitation movie. More so, the character is a hero for people of the same background in a world where action heroes are unnecessarily white. As for Othello, one of the key themes is racism. It’s specifically about a Moorish character, that’s the very purpose of the story. 

You cannot claim Bond movies serve the same purpose. It’s isn’t about race. Class, yes but not at all race. Bond is a womanising, borderline alcoholic, posh, slick, gun-toting, suave, world-saving British secret agent. To say he can’t be black is... well it’s not good. 

I never said it defined him, I said it’s important to his background/back story.
No issue with Moneypenny being black, or M being female.
I think your stretching it by saying that his parents could have been black, maybe in recent history it’s more of a possibility, but highly unlikely or even a serious consideration for Fleming when he wrote the original books and illustrations, which is my point, Bond in his eyes was clearly white, British upper class, and all of the privileges that went with that, to now make his character Black, for me, is box ticking, virtual signalling woke nonsense.
By all means introduce more BAME and LGBTQ+  characters into the Bond universe to represent a changing/changed Britain since his inception, but Bond is Bond is Bond.

You implied it defied him when you compared him to Shaft and Othello, two characters who are absolutely defined by their heritage. 

JiMMy 85 said:

DA9 said:

JiMMy 85 said:

DA9 said:

Gillis said:

DA9 said:

Watch Taboo and revenant and then claim he can’t act, and as Ronnie Kray in Legend....outstanding 

And whilst I’m here, James Bond should never be anything but a white actor, whole back story would be ruined otherwise, Idris Elba is a fantastic actor, and taken in isolation would suit it, but, there is a whole lot more to consider than just acting, the whole (as mentioned) back story of a white Scottish father and white Swiss mother, plus the Fleming original book illustrations, based on a white character.

Using the same logic, shaft and othello could be played by white actors, equally ridiculous and wrong in my view.

I'm not saying Bond shouldn't always be portrayed by a white actor, but equally it seems a bit silly to get hung up on 'back story' when the bloke's been the same age for 60 years and had six different faces.

Take the back story away it ruins the whole franchise imo, like restarting batman or superman whose parents didn’t get murdered or their planet didn’t blow up
yes, it’s suspension of belief, but it’s important to who he is and his background 

Bond’s backstory is not what defines him. It’s hardly even touched in the the vast majority of Bond movies so I don’t see why it’s relevant. I certainly don’t think it should be used as an excuse to defy a black actor from playing the role. I’m not even sure why a Swiss and Scottish couple can’t be black anyway. Further still, why is that backstory not allowed to be updated, even if you can’t buy the idea that Scottish and Swiss people can be black? 

Plenty of other elements have been updated - Moneypenny is now black, and a field agent. Is her character ‘ruined’? Was it a bad thing when M was played by a woman? 

We’ve been over this before, possibly in this thread, but the Shaft comparison is a really good way of highlighting how you’ve missed the point; Shaft is defined by being African-American. That’s the very purpose of the black exploitation movie. More so, the character is a hero for people of the same background in a world where action heroes are unnecessarily white. As for Othello, one of the key themes is racism. It’s specifically about a Moorish character, that’s the very purpose of the story. 

You cannot claim Bond movies serve the same purpose. It’s isn’t about race. Class, yes but not at all race. Bond is a womanising, borderline alcoholic, posh, slick, gun-toting, suave, world-saving British secret agent. To say he can’t be black is... well it’s not good. 

I never said it defined him, I said it’s important to his background/back story.
No issue with Moneypenny being black, or M being female.
I think your stretching it by saying that his parents could have been black, maybe in recent history it’s more of a possibility, but highly unlikely or even a serious consideration for Fleming when he wrote the original books and illustrations, which is my point, Bond in his eyes was clearly white, British upper class, and all of the privileges that went with that, to now make his character Black, for me, is box ticking, virtual signalling woke nonsense.
By all means introduce more BAME and LGBTQ+  characters into the Bond universe to represent a changing/changed Britain since his inception, but Bond is Bond is Bond.

You implied it defied him when you compared him to Shaft and Othello, two characters who are absolutely defined by their heritage. 

There are a lot of things about Fleming’s books that would no longer fly, particularly the treatment of women. The books were written in a time when racist attitudes were far more prevalent, so I fail to see how that’s justification for not having a black (or indeed any other heritage) actor now. And to be clear, the backstory that you’re so attached to wasn’t established until the 12th novel. To me, it sounds like a bullshit, tenuous excuse to claim that backstory can’t be used, or tweaked, for a non-white casting of the role. Is it really more important to have a backstory (that’s almost never referred to) remain intact than to have a non-white actor? What about the rest of the backstory that’s no longer viable? It’s not like Daniel Craig’s version could have fought in WW2. 

As for the box ticking/ woke culture - have you ever stopped to consider that if someone is the right person for a role, their skin colour shouldn’t stand in the way? Cos you really should. 

I was a long standing advocate for, and hoped for Idris Elba to get the Doctor Who role, either him, Sanjeev Bhaskar, Meera Syal or Miriam Margolyes, and enjoyed the bed wetting on social media when Jodie Whittaker got the role (although she is terrible). So, no issue with black/Asian or female actors playing roles where race or gender are irrelevant, but I do believe that Bond as a character and as an identity should stay what he is, white, upper class and a bit of a shit.

Addickted said:

Think I'd prefer to see Tom Allen as Bond.

Fails the height test

DA9 said:

Watch Taboo and revenant and then claim he can’t act, and as Ronnie Kray in Legend....outstanding 

And whilst I’m here, James Bond should never be anything but a white actor, whole back story would be ruined otherwise, Idris Elba is a fantastic actor, and taken in isolation would suit it, but, there is a whole lot more to consider than just acting, the whole (as mentioned) back story of a white Scottish father and white Swiss mother, plus the Fleming original book illustrations, based on a white character.

Using the same logic, shaft and othello could be played by white actors, equally ridiculous and wrong in my view.

Watched em both.
Could’nt distinguish much difference.
Same grunts and groans.
Maybe it’s just me but I find him exactly the same in every role. Mumbling and at times incoherent 🤷‍♀️