Fleming’s Bond (l) and Bond-in-Waiting Idris Elba
There’s really no denying it: some conservatives have persistent hang-ups about race, and it undermines their more rational, perceptive views on other matters. A relatively trivial but revealing example occurred in the aftermath of the Sony computer hack by North Korea (or Hacker X). One of the revelations was that Sony, which owns the James Bond franchise, was seriously considering re-booting the character, currently played by the estimable, but aging, Daniel Craig, with a black British actor (be sure to mock anyone who calls him an “African-American), Idris Elba.
If you are unfamiliar with Elba, you should watch the British series “Luther” on Netflix. He’s terrific: athletic, sexy, charismatic and passionate, not to mention his aura of cold-bloodedness and danger—in short, perfect for James Bond. But Rush Limbaugh, apparently seeking to retroactively validate the title of Al Franken’s book, “Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot,” decided to use the threat of non-traditional casting to make liberal heads explode, his mission in life:
“That’s NOT who James Bond is, and I know it’s racist to probably even point this out: We had 50 years of white Bonds because Bond is white. Bond was never black. Ian Fleming never created a black Brit to play James Bond. The character was always white. He was always Scottish.”
It is hard to pack so much idiocy into five sentences, but Rush is up to the task. James Bond is a British secret agent: race doesn’t factor into the stories at all. We’ve had 50 years of white Bonds because that’s the conventional way of portraying the character, that’s all. Rush’s argument here is just “Everybody does it.” So what? James Bond movies are entertainment, and if an entertaining James Bond film can be made with Elba as Bond, and there is no reason in the world why not, then James Bond can be black.
The argument that Bond was “never black” is just as fatuous as the initial objection to Craig because he is blonde and blue-eyed. (I think Craig is the second-best Bond ever, next to the uber-Bond, Sean Connery). What the hell does “Ian Fleming never created a black Brit to play James Bond” mean? To my knowledge, Ian Fleming didn’t “create” any actor to play James Bond. He based Bond on the mysterious Bill Stevenson, the British espionage mastermind who is the subject of the jaw-dropping biography “The Man Who Never Was” by Ewen Montagu. There is nothing in Stevenson’s life that wouldn’t be plausible if he had been black.
And someone should enlighten Rush that there is nothing mutually exclusive about being Scottish and black.
Bond’s best friend in the Fleming novels is Felix Leiter, a CIA agent. Leiter is white in the novels, but when he was played by black actor Bernie Casey in “Never Say Never,” many critics felt that he was the best Leiter yet, and so did I. Rush didn’t complain, either. Leiter, by the way, loses a leg and a hand in a shark attack in the Bond series as written by Fleming, but has always been played by four-limbed actors. Ian must be rolling in his grave.
Amazingly, Mediaite’s usually reasonable conservative-ish reporter Joe Concha doubles down on Rush’s biased lunacy with a post titled “Rush Is Right: James Bond Is White – Here’s a Very Big Reason Why.” Do you know what that “very big reason” is? The reason Concha finds so compelling is that Fleming envisioned Bond as a white guy. Well, he had to envision him as something.
Thornton Wilder envisioned Dolly Levy as a middle-aged Jewish woman, but that didn’t keep a young Barbra Streisand from playing the role in the film version of “Hello Dolly!” (based on Wilder’s The Matchmaker) or Pearl Bailey, an African American, from bringing down the house as Dolly in her long running stage tour. Author Jim Grant describes his character Jack Reacher, the hero of a series of novels as popular as the Bond books were when the first film was made, as 6’5″ tall with a 50-inch chest, weighing between 220 and 250 pounds, with ice-blue eyes and dirty blond hair. Naturally, the actor cast as this blonde behemoth in the first film adaptation was….Tom Cruise, who sleeps in a tea cup. Yet the film was successful, Cruise is slated to do another Reacher movie, and Grant called the first film “fantastic.” (Rush, strangely, was silent) Size is far more central to Jack Reacher’s character—he beats everybody up— than race is to James Bond.
Would Fleming object to a black Bond? Who knows? Who cares, other than Rush and Concha? I guarantee that Charles Lutwidge Dodgson ( aka Lewis Carroll) would have retched at the idea of a post-pubescent actress playing “Alice” in a film version of “Alice in Wonderland,” but that didn’t stop Tim Burton from casting one, or the movie from being a hit. Davy Crockett would retch if he knew he had been played by Billy Bob Thornton in the latest film about the Alamo, and Davy was real. Rush didn’t kick about that either, nor is he upset about Marvel Comics giving a sex change operation to Thor, who is a world-famous mythological male Norse god, so he now looks like this:
In the case of Thor, one really could say that this isn’t who Thor “is,” since the character is an icon of Norse legend, female warriors in that mythology were Valkyries, and Thor was no Valkyrie. As a fictional creation, however, the only constraints on how Thor is portrayed are imagination and effectiveness: does the new version entertain and add something of value to the character? I’m dubious about Girl Thor, but I’ll give it a chance. I have no doubts at all that Idris Elba, given a decent script and director, will do James Bond proud.
So to Rush size doesn’t matter, age doesn’t matter and gender doesn’t matter when it comes to film versions of characters, but something as superficial and, in this instance, irrelevant as color is a big deal (unless it’s just the icon’s pal, and not the icon himself.) It seems to me that Limbaugh’s objection arises from a racial bias: changing James Bond’s race is deeply disturbing to him, and there is no rational reason for it. Conservatives don’t like change for change’s sake, but opening up traditional white characters to new audiences and interpretations is not that. It is one of the best and most valid uses of diversity.
You know who Ian Fleming really would have objected to as James Bond?
Roger Moore.
____________________________
Sources: Mediaite 1, 2
Ethics Alarms 
I agreed with just about every word here — other than your rankings. I prefer Craig over Connery — not that I would throw either one out … (I’m pretty sure my husband would understand.)
As for Rush, I’ve had to listen to him my entire life, and I still haven’t figured out if he “believes” half of the things he says. Even if he doesn’t though, much of his audience does, and he does significant damage whenever he goes on tirades like this.
That’s a great point, Beth—Rush often says things just to stir the pot, and he’s a genius at that. But it can be damaging, and this is an example.
Jack,
One of your best — even down to having picked the perfect picture of Elba. Hope you’re having a wonderful New Year!
I am, Neil, and I hope your holidays were endurable. I’m so sorry for your loss. Nothing is harder.
As an interesting side-note, there were similar rumors concerning Elba and the recasting of Doctor Who, following the departure of Matt Smith (a role that was eventually filled by Scottish actor, Peter Capaldi — which became a whole other controversy) and people made many of the same complaints.
The attacks proved especially ridiculous in that context, as the show had already established the Doctor’s race had the ability to regenerate by complete altering their personality, physical appearance, and even sex (the Master [now Mistress], his long-time enemy, was recently recast as a woman) — but apparently darker skin would have been too much.
You’re right, that’s even more ridiculous than complaining about a black Bond.
I have one complaint about Elba, and it is the same one I have for ALL of the James Bond actors…all of them are striking in either looks or size. A real spy should be as non-descript as possible and NEVER, EVER draw attention to him/her-self. Bond is, apparently, the exception.
Cary Grant was the first actor offered the part. Talk about a guy who stood out in a crowd…
No kiddin’!! I had forgotten about that.
Have you seen Roger Moore? Most forgettable man on the planet.
“Always be the grey man”.
Exactly. I, with my 6’2″ and suave good looks, for instance, would make a terrible spy.
Holy cow – Idris Elba is black? Why didn’t I notice that when he was cast as Heimdall, “the whitest of the Gods”? The only problem I have with him as Bond (he’d be awesome) is that he’d be limited in time to continue working with Marvel.
James Bond, undercover brother, licensed to ill.
I chuckled when this story first came around because my friends and I had used Idris Elba previously. Before Affleck was cast, we thought Idris would have been a great choice to portray Bruce Wayne / Batman. In fact, I still like him for that role more than I like him for James Bond.
Well, I think I’d rather see him star in “The Ben Affleck Story” than Ben, for that matter.
Your analysis is correct.
But I will gripe. I find all the Bond movies tedious and avoid them as best as possible.
The movie Ronin (Robert De Niro – 1998) hands down spanks all the Bond movies combined. It has a more intriguing plot line, and a more enjoyable story, a better car chase scene, more believable action sequences including a realistic YET STILL GRIPPING final fight.
Not one of them was half as good as the book it was based on. I’m not a Bond fan—the worst Bond movies, Moore’s, were actually the most entertaining, because they were essentially comedies. I liked “Never Say Never.”
Ever see “The Spy Who Came In From The Cold”/ Richard Burton, but aside from that, pretty good.
Looking ahead, I am envisioning a remake of “Selma” . . .
. . . with, say, Rutger Hauer playing MLK.
Rush reminds me of Paul Harvey. When I had to get up and get going on a below-freezing Colorado morning in the 70s, I set the alarm to go off with Harvey’s voice. The radio was unreachable from the bed. Sooner or later — usually within a couple of minutes — he would say something that would do the trick.
I basically agree agree with you Jack. I have no real concern one way or the other.
However, not knowing Rush’s motivation, his position forms a nice counterpoint to the liberal view of racial purity that maintains Mickey Rooney cannot play an asian person, an Italian or Hispanic person cannot play Tonto (that includes Johnny Depp, but, strangely, the liberals would love it if Elizabeth Warren, Native American Priestess that she is, were cast in that position, just for the gender-bending effect it would have in raising all of our collective and individual concsciousness-es-es). They are complaining when transgender characters aren’t played by bons fide post-op trangendered people now.
So, I could see Rush doing two things: 1) poking fun at liberals by imitating them (of course, they don’t get it); 2) and sticking his thumb in the eyes of all the people who are collectively swooning over the fact that the “Bond Color Barrier” has now been broken, because, after all, none of this would have been possible if Obama had not been elected.
-Jut
Say what you will about Moore, but his wacky Bond is as cold-blooded as any; unfortunately he loses in the sexiness aspect.
I object more to Brosnan as Bond. He’s too suave and in-control to be emotionally effective as a character. That is why I welcomed Craig and his darker portrayal. For a much better fit as a spy character see Brosnan in “The Tailor of Panama”, that plays to his strengths and is equal parts entertaining and cynical; something I never saw him pull as 007.
I hated the Brosnan Bond films. Surfing that big wave in the tux was it for me.
Oh, you’re going to hold Pierce Brosnan responsible for Die Another Day? That’s not fair.
I blame Madonna.
(I would love to have a long conversation about Bond with you, Jack. I happen to like Roger Moore AND Diamonds are Forever. And I hated Quantum of Solace.)
I’m stunned. Roger seems like a nice guy and all, but he was a big lump in all his movies. I can’t imagine how anyone could take him seriously. The guy spent his career subbing for better originators of famous roles—The Saint, Maverick, and Bond.
DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER was Sean Connery, in Vegas…oh, and a really nice Red Mustang.
Awful movie, though…except that it gave Natalie Wood’s little sister a shot.
Agreed, on both counts. And, there was that physics-defying change of “tilt” while the Mustang was up on 2 wheels. That merely confirmed that these movies were NOT meant to be taken seriously.
I thought Diamonds Are Forever had the prettiest Bond girl.
Jill St. John or Lana Wood? Although both are very attractive, I’d call Jill more ‘cute’ than pretty. Lana was, in my humble opinion, gorgeous.
Jill St. John — but I’m a straight female, what do I know? 🙂
Lana…
Jill…
As local actresses know, I’m a sucker for a redhead…
http://www.corbisimages.com/images/Corbis-WL002638.jpg?size=67&uid=26faa936-5647-4bef-a2c5-f2405ec47169
Heh, so was Brezhnev, apparently.
Don’t know if that aide behind him was his or Nixon’s but he was impressed too. The only one of the three who wasn’t was …wait for it…Nixon.
I have to mention Caroline Cossey, even though she was only an extra.
Chromosomally 48,XXYY.
With others from the same Bond film
Some historical shots…
I’m pretty sure I could take Brosnan in a bar fight.
Please, nobody tell Rush that M was played by a chick…
Good catch—in all the Craig Bond films.
A CHICK? I have a little trouble describing a Dame of the United Kingdom as a “chick”.
I think you kind of missed hitting the nail on the head completely, but you were close, and when you said “The argument that Bond was “never black” is just as fatuous as the initial objection to Craig because he is blonde and blue-eyed.”
The reason we don’t care about secondary characters is that they just aren’t as iconic. Once a character receives enough acclaim to be iconic…. we as society resist changing that icon. And it’s not just that Idris is black and this is an issue of racism, it’s that Idris doesn’t fit the Icon. When people made controversy over blond hair and blue eyes, we weren’t having a discussion about racism, and I think there’s more at play here.
There’s been a push recently, especially prevalent in DC and Marvel to try to appeal to a wider audience, a female Thor, a black Captain America, a Mexican Spiderman being prime examples. And some people are afraid that we’re dismantling traditional white icons. And we are… Call a spade a spade, I’m just not that threatened. These icons came to prominence in an era where a black icon just wouldn’t get traction, and now we have all these very entrenched franchises that would be hard for new players to break into. Everything has been done. Think Avatar, what appeared as a unique idea on it’s face, but was really Pocahontas with blue people, and Pocahontas was really Dances with Wolves with a woman. Having a little diversity isn’t a bad thing, and it has to come from somewhere.
I like Idris as James Bond, he fits the style.
But that’s the point–he fits the icon in every way (and I don’t think Bond is an icon, not in my book) except color, and so what? What does color have to do with Bond?
What does color have to do with Bond? Probably very little. But what does color have to do with our perception of Bond? A lot. Bond, as I understand was never meant to be a rotating role, Hollywood did that because the franchise made money and Sean Connery was either too old or unavailable.
Imagine this happening to more contemporary examples, like Harry Potter, or Jacob from Twilight, or The Hulk (I think a neon hot pink Hulk might demonstrate my point best, if we don’t care about cannon, why not? Because it isn’t what we expect.) This is a first-in principle.
Like I said, I understand the point of people getting their panties in a twist, even while I disagree with them, and I don’t think that all (or even most) of the conversation is really about race so much as continuity.
Nah, it’s about race. I’m not sure what “never meant to be a rotating role” means. Was Sherlock Holmes meant to be a rotating role? Jack Ryan? Dracula? If a character is popular enough to last decades, then it has hit the jack-pot: Hollywood prays that any such part is rotating role.
You are right that once a character has a visual persona, then audiences resist change. Sometimes on actor so captures a character that no one can play the role until generations have intervened that don’t remember the original. Raymond Burr WAS Perry Mason, and all attempts to re-boot have failed. Clayton Moore captured the Lone Ranger, which is one reason (other than the stinky movies) that the film versions have failed. Nobody will accept anyone but Clark Cable as Rhett Butler or Humphrey Bogart as Rick in Casablanca. Gregory Peck is Atticus Finch.
The fact that Bond HAS been handled by other actors successfully, however takes it out of this category. There is no reason in the world why he can’t be black, other than whites deciding that “he’s ours.“
It’s about race because it assumes culture is inherently attached to race – just like the premise that makes a racist joke racist…it attaches a required characteristic to a specific ethnicity on the basis that “your born that color, you have this trait”. Statistically it is common to find similar cultures within similar ethnic groups, but that isn’t the case in the modern world anymore, and especially in the Western World and even more so in America, that trend is very rapidly being stamped out.
If James Bond were an 17th century Scottish noble, of course the character would be white *FOR HISTORICAL ACCURACY*. But for story telling purposes? Who cares? If a director wanted to tell the story of the struggles of a 17th century Scottish Noble, if there is NO STORYTELLING need to have a white actor, then who cares? If there is a storytelling need to have a white actor, then in no way could that be called a racist casting call (which is what saying Bond has to be White is…a racist casting call)
This is why we can get away with black Robin Hoods…because the story transcends the ethnic attachment to the culture of the time. This is why, we get away with WHITE Jesuses and why to an extent we can get away with white Tonto’s. To be clear, we can get away with Black Jesuses and black Tonto’s also (anyone care to challenge that there were substantial numbers of black tribal members?)
To me, if we really want to breach the racist notion that you are this color, therefore you are this culture, it shouldn’t matter who portrays who. I will even go so far as to say that, eventually, it shouldn’t matter if a white guy plays MLKJr. Color will matter as long as the specific story being told is one about specific Colors… the obvious bit of that is as generations pass and generations pass, the specific colors in question should become quite irrelevant.
The flipside of this being, if a story about a Scottish nobleman in the 17th century communicated cultural values relevant to a modern black person, the modern black person should be completely comfortable enough saying “That’s hero is *mine*”. Because ethnicity shouldn’t matter.
The Movie franchise has made overtures that “James Bond, 007” is a title, and not the spy’s actual name. Moneypenny said, “There were better Bonds than you” to Daniel Craig, for instance. That’s what I meant by a rotating role that wasn’t intended by the author. Regardless… I think we basically agree, except on scale, my point isn’t that there isn’t an amount of racism involved, more than it isn’t based on racism in it’s entirety.
The worst Bond ever was George Lazenby in Her Majesty’s Secret Service
It was a lousy movie, but I didn’t mind George. Did you know he turned up in “Gettysburg”?
And even Hollywood was able to figure that out. Note that he only made the one movie.
As someone whose read the Bond books when I heard the rumors about Elba I thought, “I can see that.” For me the only film bonds that count so far are Connery and Craig. Bond was never meant to be a pretty boy. Fleming describes him as looking like Hoagy Carmichael. Now, that’s neither Connery nor Craig, but it’s definitely not Moore or Brosnan. We are already far from the creator’s vision and that’s without the crocodile bridge (Live and Let Die).
Horrible movie, of my favorite Bond book. Yaphet Koto blowing up like a Macy’s balloon was the most ridiculous effect in the whole series.
I, discriminating film critic that I am not, love all the Bond films and I can’t see how Idris Elba could change that. I do, however, refuse to watch Tom Cruise play Jack Reacher or anyone other than Harrison Ford play Indiana Jones.
Tom Cruise doesn’t quite fit the image, does he?
Not in any way, even if he were the best actor in the world.
Possibly because he’s only 4 feet tall? He (Jack Reacher) is supposed to be a Hulk, and TC is definitely NOT.
Part of the story of the comic-book Thor is that his powers are held in his hammer; at several points in the series, someone other than Thor himself (who qualifies) picks up Mjolnir and, as the recipient of Thor’s powers, becomes a “new” Thor.
This is what happened in the comic — it’s just that the person who picked up the iconic weapon this time happens to be female. The original Thor is still around (without his usual powers and, apparently, wielding an axe).
As such, I wouldn’t describe Thor as having received a sex-change operation. It’s nowhere near accurate.
And it looks like this was edited while I was away (I left it halfway written and did several other things in the interval). Sorry if it makes no sense…
I was speaking metaphorically, as I thought was obvious. Who would do a sex change operation on a god? Anyway, my comments about Thor stand. Thor is a mythical figure with substantial cultural record, and however they try to explain it, Thor is no more a female than Pauline Bunyan or Zeusette.
The image conjured by “Zeusette” — classic stereotype of a saucy maid atop Mt. Olympus’ Eiffel Tower hurling thunderbolts with one hand while balancing a trayful of cocktails on the other — made me laugh to tears. Thanks for the cathartic break.
Not Thor – Thora.
As for who’d do the Op? Mother Nature.It happens sometimes. OK, so Thor/a is divine. But if gods exist, so is Gaea. And she’s a real Mother.
See also remarks on Bond Girl Caroline Cossey, above.
I agree, he’ll make a great Bond, I’ve loved him in Luther.
I like the fan theory that James Bond and Q are just the code names for the positions. Different people have the name because people retire or are killed.
My favorite fan theory is that “James Bond” is a code name; that there have been multiple “Bonds”* (retired or successfully sliced in half by laser throughout the years). One could just say that now that the old British lady “M” has died (at the hand of a former “Bond” who went insane???), the new “M” might simply have been more open to a “Black Bond”.
Hopefully he fulfills the role in an exemplary manner, so that future black candidates are not unfairly hampered.
*(What a happy coincident that a man born “James Bond” from Skyfall, Scotland, grew up to be qualified for the position!)
It has to be a title, as you say.
Consider – James Bond appeared in a movie 50 years ago.
If all the Bond movies had used sets from that era, then yes, continuity would require the different actors to be physically similar. Minor differences can be handwaved away as results of plastic surgery.
OTOH so can skin colour, it’s more areas such as height that are a problem.