Daniel Craig thinks women deserve more than a woman-led Bond movie
The No Time To Die stars says, "There should simply be better parts for women and actors of color."
Aux News Daniel Craig
No Time To Die star Daniel Craig bid a teary adieu to James Bond when the filming wrapped in 2019. Now, No Time To Die is finally hitting theaters on October 8, and folks are already wondering who will be the next 007. As other iconic film franchises have brought in women leads for previously male-led roles to varied success (Ghostbusters, Ocean’s Eight, and soon Indiana Jones), the conversation around a woman Bond has arisen once again. However, Craig thinks there should be well-written roles created with women and POC in mind specifically, versus bringing them into the fold now.
“The answer to that is very simple,” Craig says in an interview with Radio Times. “There should simply be better parts for women and actors of color. Why should a woman play James Bond when there should be a part just as good as James Bond, but for a woman?”
It’s a compelling argument that has been misconstrued as people saying Craig thinks a woman could never play a sophisticated and stoic character like Bond. What the actor actually points out is women and people of color deserve: 1) more lead roles in general and 2) should have better opportunities than taking over a pre-existing male-dominated franchise.
No Time To Die will differ from the 007 films before it, as Lashana Lynch enters the cast as the first Black woman “00" agent. Fleabag’s Phoebe Waller-Bridge joined the writing team for No Time To Die, hoping to elevate the women’s roles. Craig gives kudos to the writer’s sensibilities and how they shine in the forthcoming installment.
“She’s got devilish humor. Her influence permeates a lot of this film. She walked that fantastic line of keeping it as a thriller and being very funny,” Craig said. “But Phoebe didn’t come in to change Bond. She came in to spice it up for sure, but she’s a Bond fan—she wasn’t about to take him in a different direction.”
Nonetheless, all previous Bonds have been portrayed by a middle-aged white man, so there is a lot of room for changes as the franchise moves forward. However, much of what Craig gets at has been echoed by Bond franchise producers, who are adamant in their stance that Bond will always be played by a man.
“He can be of any color, but he is male… I believe we should be creating new characters for women—strong female characters,” Barbara Broccoli told Variety last year. “I’m not particularly interested in taking a male character and having a woman play it. I think women are far more interesting than that.”
172 Comments
He’s absolutely right, although i suspect he’s tempering his words while he’s still promoting his movie. Bond is a thankless, empty role, he’s very vocally hated it for like three movies now. You have to work yourself to the bone for months at a time all to play fundamentally unchanging and regressive character, and I’m sure it hasn’t helped that he’s played Bond as a completely emotionless robot since Skyfall. Nobody, male or female, should be clamoring for the role, in the same way we shouldn’t be insisting that Spinal Tap hire a woman to be their next drummer.
Porque no los dos?
Some important context: Craig doesn’t like playing Bond, so to him the question is like asking “should a woman be the next person to do the unpleasant thing that you’re currently almost free from doing?”
Since when is 30 (George Lazenby) or 32 (Sean Connery in Dr. No) middle aged?I’d also dispute late 30s (Daniel Craig in Casino Royale) or early-mid 40s (everyone else in their first movies) being middle aged.
It’s the AV Club, just go with it
I just like the implication that there’s some big groundswell of support for either a super young or super old Bond. Well, why can’t James Bond be played by a 7-year-old?!
James Bond Jr. WAS attempted so…
I hadn’t even considered Connery and Lazenby but my first thought was how Craig was 37 when he began filming Casino Royale, which is definitely not middle-aged.
Thank you, I was having a brief “Am I middle aged now? The children are largely wrong…” moment when contemplated if Craig was borderline or not.
James Bond is a Commander in the Royal Navy. Average age of which these days is around 42, so given a bit of cinematic licence mid/late 30’s would be about the perfect age for anyone in the role.
Male life expectancy is 78, so 39 or later surely counts as middle aged, and given that “middle age” is a period, not a moment, it’s hard to argue with 35, although I can see the argument for 30 pushing it. I guess people, consciously or not, subtract the first 18, or maybe even 21 years, so the life expectancy is 60 “adult” years, giving 48 as being “halfway through adulthood”.
If we divide life expectancy into thirds, we get the first 26 years as being “youth”, 27-52 “middle aged”, and 53-78 “elderly”. We could also divide by fourths, giving 0-20 as “child”, 20-40 “young adult”, 40-60 “middle aged”, 60-80 “elderly”.
In Fleming’s Casino Royale, which was the first Bond novel, Bond was 30. By the last book, he was 42
The average human lifespan is 77. 38 is halfway.
Considering that that median life expectancy is well short of 90, I’d say 30 is generous.
Given the lifespan of Double-0’s, all Bonds are frankly octogenarian.That said, both my grandfathers (admittedly heavy smokers) died at 69. I’m 35 now, so as far as I’m concerned, I’m middle-aged.
You say that, but look how ancient he is in A View to a Kill.
Sean Connery was born middle-aged and 40’s is definitely middle aged.
Isn’t Idris Elba the perfect choice? He’s younger than Daniel Craig.
If there is going to be a black James Bond, it simply must be him.
Out of interest, how many white men do you think are acceptable options to play Bond?
when i saw high-rise i really thought tom hiddleston could be a good fit, but he’s too mired in loki and i’m sort of over it now.if henry cavill wasn’t in so many franchises he’d have been great, same with robert pattinson, who i think could be a really interesting, frantic bond.other than that the only young, british actors who have excited me have been POC. someone said dev patel, but i think riz ahmed has a bit more of a cool, steely stare.
One…Frank Stallone.
How was your response not punctuated by “you guessed it”?
It’s not a matter of how many black men would be acceptable in the role, its a matter of Idris Elba being perfect as James Bond.
Idris Elba would have been a great Bond if Craig had not already played a Bond with the same basic comportment as Elba. Casting them one after the other does both a disservice.
i think 10 years ago that could have been cool, but the ship has sailed. he’d be over 50 by the time it gets going.that being said there are a lot of interesting and young actors i’d love to see in the role – henry goulding looks great in a suit and can kick ass, daniel kaluuya is suave but can also do psycho killer, i think john boyega could be interesting.
Dev Patel.
I agree with all you said, Kaluuya has my vote.
Henry Golding would make an awesome Bond.
I don’t think Idris Elba would be very good at playing a woman as James Bond.
Give him a shot coach!
I dunno, the man’s got range.
Exactly. The man can do anything.
Underrated Comment
That’s more of a Martin Lawrence thing: Big Momma’s House 007
He’s younger now, not when Craig started. Most of them started in their 30s.Besides, I’ve never really seen it. Elba is a big dude; Bond is fit but not built.
I don’t think much older, so they’d have to adjust to having an older 00 agent (I don’t see why spies can’t be “older” gentlemen or ladies anyway in fact it would make them easier to blend in) and tone down the stunts for what a middle-aged man could do, or else you go into Roger Moore territory.
Idris Elba as a George Smiley character would rule. I mean, he’s waaaaay too handsome and fit to play George Smiley, but just sort of a Le Carre type who walks around asking questions for 3/4 of the movie. I’m down!
My vote for a black Bond goes to John David Washington. He really knocked it out of the park in Tenet.
You are not wrong.
Well, James Bond isn’t a Time Lord or even River Song-like Time Lord adjacent so there’s that for starters.
But what this film presupposes it: what if he is?
Then I guess once six more actors play him, they’ll have to make up an excuse for why he still has regenerations.
James Bond is a code name. So the person using that name doesn’t have to be male.
Yes, females deserve cool franchise roles. But existing franchises shouldn’t be off limits. What’s next, making Doctor Who a lady? Blasphemy!
It’s not; they even came up with a Bond family coat of arms.
But it’s not. Skyfall and other films confirmed it is his actual name. The family motto is Orbis non sufficit, or The World is Not EnoughIt really should be a code name since using your birth name while on the field seems very dangerous
James Bond is a single character, not a code name for several.Exhibit A:
Exhibit B: Roger Moore’s Bond visiting the grave of Tracy in the pre title sequence of For Your Eyes Only.If JB is just a codename, what the hell is he doing that for?
Skyfall too had Bond gravestones
Call me crazy but it would be kind of fun to have a Bond adjacent film where we see everything from the view point of Ms. Moneypenny. Somebody has to move all the bodies of those dead evil henchmen Bond kills. Or even make his travel arrangements (“will there be a car that also drives underwater available for the weekend of September 11-13?”)
And make it a comedy.
It could be like that episode of House that followed Wilson around, and House’s increasingly erratic storyline just occasionally crossed paths with a much more normal one.
Lord and Miller directing.
I mean, that’s kind of what Spy is. Obviously she gets a lot more into it, but that’s where it starts.
Such books exist as official spin-offs.
this is perfect! love the idea of a female-led spinoff.
Maybe it wouldn’t support a whole 2 hours but I’d want to see a DVD extra about how Q’s life goes. Just have him and M in a conference room at Aston Martin negotiating how if they can’t design their new cars with more room for missile launchers near the headlights then they will have to terminate their contract and other ridiculous stories about how Bond gadgets get made.
I know I would much rather see something like Black Panther which is by and about POC that tells stories from their perspective than “It’s James Bond but he’s [record scratch] a Lady!?”
Either you have her behave exactly like the male Bonds—a womanizing, martini-drinking, tuxedo-wearing, quip-happy assassin—which…could be kind of fun, but a lot of people would just interpret it as parody. Or you completely rewrite the character, in which case the best possible audience reaction would probably be “okay, cool, but that’s not James Bond?”
I would totally be okay with the idea of Margot Robbie, decked out in all of her Sharon Tate styled outfits and eyewear, playing a sort of female James Bond figure. Just think of all the cool gadgets you come up with for high-heeled go-go boots.
It’s a shame that Man from U.N.C.L.E. bombed. Would have fitted in well with a sequel.
I would totally be okay with the idea of Margot Robbie, decked out in all of her Sharon Tate styled outfits and eyewear, playing a sort of female James Bond figure. Just think of all the cool gadgets you come up with for high-heeled go-go boots.This is where I pitch a movie adaptation of the unjustly forgotten sixties spy-caper FPS “No One Lives Forever”. Seriously, look it up – you’ll think someone kidnapped your brain and fled to 2000 with it.
Unfortunately, the rights to the series are tied up between Activision, WB and whatever’s left of Fox.Nightdive Studios was trying to remaster the two games a few years back, but none of the studios could decide who owned the rights. And WB said they had no interest in doing anything with the IP anyways.
Margot Robbie in “Danger Girl”!
I would totally be okay with the idea of Margot Robbie […] playing a sort of female James Bond figure
you could slice a cake with her shoulders. She is a slight woman, and only in fantasy movies can one pretend she could take on any one single melee opponent.
I’d go for a woman with Grace Jones -levels of physicality. Show me a lifetime of physical conditioning by a woman with a not-tiny frame, and i can be convinced she could be a field agent with a license to kill with whatever means are at her disposal.
“The name is Stock. Jamie Stock.”
That description reminds me a bit of Theron’s performance in “Atomic Blonde” which I love. She got to be Bonde-esque but with none of the baggage and the plot was a bit different than some of the more standard Bond boilerplates. Kind of more Le Carre only with slick fight scenes and fewer bespectacled elderly British men.
Nobody mentions Charlize Theron in Atomic Blonde, which was a very good female Bond homage, and better than most of the actual James Bond films imo.
Or you completely rewrite the character, in which case the best possible audience reaction would probably be “okay, cool, but that’s not James Bond?” But…but…but, see, it’s still called “James Bond”! See? So it IS James Bond! See, the most important thing about a movie, a video game, or any media, frankly, is it’s BRANDING. So, if it’s called “James Bond”, it’s still “James Bond”. So even if it is- I mean, even if YOU think it’s something different, it’s NOT. So, if you’re a James Bond fan, you HAVE to see this movie, even if the role of Bond is now played by a 114-year-old Peruvian lady and the entire movie is 98 minutes of her knitting a scarf, with zero special effects! If you don’t like it, then you can’t be a James Bond fan!
Remember the shit storm when they made an all female Ghostbusters?Not that it wasn’t idiotic, but why put a woman thru that, when, like Daniel said, there are much better opportunities for women than to remake something that is 70 years old and has always been played by white guys. TBS, If they keep making Bond movies, this is the only choice.
remember how much shit craig himself went through just for being blonde? he got cast the year twitter came out and all anyone could talk about was how much a travesty it was that a blonde man was bond.
I wonder if CraigNotBond.com still exists…
Not that I have a problem with him, but he’s already 49 yrs old. He stars as the new Bond 3 years from now, 4 movies later and he’s over 60, and you’re back to the silliness of Never Say Never Again.
I’m not stupid enough to think Elba wouldn’t kill it, but yeah, I think the window for him as Bond has passed. Even if Wilson and Broccoli were up for it (and I’m curious, one day, to see what their successor caretakers do with the franchise), the timing just hasn’t been there. Even a mint specimen like Elba is going to run into “Grandpa Bond” territory a la A View to a Kill pretty quickly.
I feel the same way. If he did a one-off film now, I think he’d kill it, cause he’s still quite fit and suave. Though they’ll likely want someone for a franchise, to lock in for at least a decade like they did with Craig. And yeah, Never Say Never Again is one of my least favorite Bond films with that silliness being a key part. That’s why I vote for Daniel Kaluuya, he’s only 32 so by the time they’ve let the dust on this Bond series settle and get ready to inevitably make a new one, he’ll likely be about the same age as Craig was when he made Casino Royale.
I’m for Daniel Kaluuya as the next Bond. Elba would have been a great choice, and if he were to just be Bond in one film I’m sure it would be fine because he’s still in great shape and looks like a suave badass, but he’s about 50 now and probably doesn’t want to dedicate the next fifteen years of his life to making Bond films. When Craig made “Spectre” he seemed like he was really burnt out, and he was only about 50 when that was released. I’d hate for Elba to get locked in a contract and be miserable during his 50’s and early 60’s. Kaluuya is only 32, so if they wait like five years before announcing the inevitable next Bond series, he’ll be about the same age Craig was when he started.
The problem was the movie in question was shit. Except among a certain crowd you couldn’t say that because it was assumed you thought women-led movies in general were shit rather than a specific shit movie.
Oh I agree it was God awful. But before anyone even saw it the “we hate girls” crowd was attacking it. It’s a shame because the talent was there. It’s not like McCarthy, Wiig, etc couldn’t get a good movie made, and Feig is a great director. The script was just bad. They were going for too much broad, slapsticky comedy, where the original was more based on Murray and Ramis’ type of humor.
I could also see Elba as M due to his age and prior experience as a stressed out boss. Like if he was a former 00 who got promoted and now has to balance his prior field work with being now part of the upper brass
It’s always worth remembering though that the Ghostbusters shitstorm was barely a storm at all and more of a cynical Sony plan to use feminism to sell their movie. They were caught deleting a lot of regular negative comments on the trailer but kept all the really ugly misogynist ones to promulgate this idea of a horrible sexist army badmouthing it, then acted like it was a feminist duty to see and support a (not very good) movie. When, in reality, it was just a relatively small collection of morons saying misogynist shit which the studio played up and the media ate up.
A story about a child of hereditary privilege who controls an advanced nation, and uses that power to give himself superpowers and fancy technological gadgets while, at least initially, adamantly refusing to share with less fortunate foreigners, is telling things from a POC perspective?
Thank you but even this is being too kind. The advanced nation that is super xenophobic and turns a blind eye to the colonization happening to its neighbors, the slavetrade, civil wars, and famine. And his mom tried to pull a coup with the help of the CIA against who everyone at that time thought was the rightful ruler.
I mean, there’s no reason they can’t do that, even in the series.
All they need to do is what they have already done: Give another character the 007 designation. It’s the same series, the universe, but they can come in with a completely clean slate
Why, though? It’s not the 007 moniker people are attached to with regard to the Bond franchise, it’s Bond himself. You can do movies with a female spy set in the same universe, but people still want to see James Bond. Do them alongside, maybe.
I don’t know why more people haven’t arrived here (the correct solution). Any female or male can be a 007; I suspect Lashana Lynch is going to crush it.
I kind of want to know what Bond does post- 00 status too. I’m imagining this film just drags him back into the action and that’s it, but what if he’s moved up to M’s status, or sent to prison for some shenanigans?
People crack on Cinematic Universe spin-offs etc but if they wanted a lady MI6 agent series I’d watch that. Bond has to take a weekend off sometime! He gets beat up a lot. Hopefully they don’t try to kill him at the sauna this time.
Ok hear me out- what if they do a What If Black Panther but it’s White Panther, and he blows his family’s fortune/vibranium supply on cocaine and sexual harassment settlements?
There’s a difference between men telling women what they SHOULD want and women expressing what they DO want.
I hate having to pull “as an Asian dude out”, but, as an Asian dude, you’re exactly right. All this, “See, you from [insert minority group here] should be able to play James Bond (or whatever minority-swap is du jour)!” pretty much denies them the fact that they may have stories of their own that they want to tell, as well as letting them know that they can only be taken seriously if they clothe themselves in the skin, so to speak, of the acceptable majority.
Since they dithered around and missed out on the Bender of Fass, just give it to Richard Madden.
Kinda agree with him. I feel like even if there were a female James Bond, people would see her as just that – a James Bond who just happens to be a woman, rather than a woman who’s an interesting character in her own right. I’m all for more women-led action franchises. Atomic Blonde and The Old Guard, as some recent examples, were fairly popular so there’s obviously a market and a demand for these stories. Maybe Anya Taylor-Joy can spearhead a series playing Furiosa after the first movie.(I just realized that all 3 properties I mentioned above have Charlize Theron starring in them lol)
That’s basically my take on the “why can’t a woman be Bond?” discourse. Why would a woman want to be Bond? He’s kind of a sad Cold War relic whose (toxic? depends on the interpretation) masculinity is pretty central to the character.
Yeah, I don’t cotton to arguments that a role that has traditionally been played by men should always be played by men, but James Bond is just not a particularly great character. Having a women play the role might be interesting, but it seems like it would be discordant more than anything.Contrast that to The Doctor, whose personality isn’t static, and hasn’t been really grounded in many traditionally masculine characteristics for quite a while anyway. That’s the sort of character that can easily be genderbent.
The Doctor can literally be anything or anyone. There’s endless possibilities with both the character and the stories you can tell. It’d be a crime not to explore that.
Bond, by contrast, is a high-functioning alcoholic who goes off to kill people because the government told him to. Is that all you want for your POC/female characters? Craig’s right; they deserve better.
I agree about the Doctor, but I think their handling of The Master/Mistress was even more interesting. Because the Master was kind of a static character who was only interested in domination/increasing his power, which is a toxic and traditionally masculine trait. Whereas Michelle Gomez, in a very delightful way, was able to keep some of the Master’s essential traits and rework them to synthesize a much more well-rounded and enjoyable character, one with some sympathy, some new ideas, and just a fantastic rapport with Peter Capaldi.
I really wish we had a Missy and 13th Doctor season before they swapped to Dhawan’s Master.
Further, for several movies now Bond has been on the receiving end of progressiveness. So he’s a pretty good mirror for masculinity and how it might change.
That definitely describes the Fleming books, only throw in racism, sexism, homophobia, nationalism, etc. The movies, particularly the Craig ones, have come a long way from the scenes in Goldfinger where Connery smacks a lady on the bum and says “move along now, man-talk” or literally sexes the lesbianism out of Pussy Galore. There have been other neat female characters in Bond movies, such as Grace Jones (May Day) or Elektra King, but it wasn’t until Eva Green in Casino Royale that the psyche of a female character was really explored, before that they were kind of one-note, even if they were cool. And Moneypenny (Naomi Harris) in Skyfall/Spectre, continues that trend.
I’m looking forward to No Time to Die, though I think credit where it is due, the Craig films really have updated his character from a Cold War relic to more current geopolitical issues and also making Bond a tough guy to be around, but because he’s dangerous, not because he’s a misogynist or because he idealizes Queen and Country etc. Skyfall did kind of portray him as a sad relic, but instead of blaming the world for changing, Bond actually worked on improving himself to fit into the new world.
I was going to include “interrogating a woman by strangling her with her bikini” in Diamonds are Forever as well
The psyche of Tereza Draco, aka Tracy Bond, is much explored in both the book and the film adaptation of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. Unfortunately, it was a direction that they never really built on for three decades.Also, remember that Ian Fleming wrote an entire Bond novel from the perspective of a female character, The Spy Who Loved Me. It’s about a young Canadian employee who spends the night at a totally empty motel where two mobsters have taken a room. Coincidentally, James Bond knocks on the door because his car broke down, and he saves her from the mobsters who were about to kill her. It was an experiment that was poorly received up to the point that Fleming sold the film rights with the caveat that only the title could be used. Which is exactly what happened… Still, the narrator is a fully fleshed woman.
The movies, particularly the Craig ones, have come a long way from the
scenes in Goldfinger where Connery smacks a lady on the bum and says
“move along now, man-talk” or literally sexes the lesbianism out of
Pussy Galore
Nah, the Daniel Craig Bond of the Sam Mendes movies is a flat-out rapist. He rapes Sévérine in Skyfall, even after she admits that she has spent her whole life as a sex slave, and he rapes Monica Bellucci in Spectre, even though he just killed her husband and doomed her. You could argue that he “seduces” them but, in both cases, he corners them where they can’t escape, he presses his large, muscular frame against them, and both of them know he is a killer. Bellucci even sheds a tear during her “seduction”.
I think the only question is whether Mendes, as a filmmaker, is subversively portraying Bond as possibly irredeemably toxic or if he gets off on it (Sévérine’s treatment, as a character, is particularly cruel)
but it wasn’t until Eva Green in Casino Royale that the psyche of a female character was really explored
I largely agree with your point, but you are forgetting Diana Rigg’s character in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.
Usually they want it simply because others don’t want them to have it. It’s a way to score a hit on the ‘patriarchy’. And it’s why movies that lean into that, like Ghostbusters, tend to bomb.
That’s how its critics see the character. How its fans see it – which is critical to its enduring appeal – is as the perfect male fantasy figure. He sleeps with any beautiful woman he wants, fights villains who are usually older and out of shape, travels to exotic locales, delivers awesome quips, drives expensive sports cars, and ends up saving the world. He is everything that every man wants to be, and the proof of that is in the most common criticisms of Daniel Craig’s portrayal: reckless, makes mistakes, psychologically tortured, and generally not being what every man wants to be 100% of the time.I think women deserve a movie character who serves their empowerment fantasies as much as Bond has for men.
Why shouldn’t women actors have a chance to deeply hate playing James Bond as much as Daniel Craig did?
and to comfort themselves by drinking smoothies made out of gold leaf and hundred dollar bills, like he does
Women deserve more than financial parity, they deserve a UNICORN and for you to ever bring up financial parity again would be an insult, you sexist.
Give it to Henry Golding, damn it.
And the next James Bond was… oh, let’s say Moe.
John Cho, goddamn it. I don’t care how old Cho is. Or that he isn’t a Brit.
I still (sort of grudgingly) have high hopes for Cowboy Bebop. In case it’s good, don’t you go trying to steal Spike from it. On the other hand, it’s Netflix adapting a beloved anime and the costumes looked odd, so maybe I’m too optimistic.
I’m optimistic for Bebop since none of the “Netflix anime” adaptations actually have anything in common with each other so far. They’re all from different production companies, and most of the ones people thought Netflix actually produced were just distributed by them.Bebop and the upcoming One Piece show share the same production house, and OP’s author is heavily involved and seems really excited for it, so I’m hopeful.
This is kind of a dumb argument, though. Imagine, if you will, a world where there are centuries of history oppression centering around men named Daniel. And then if Mr. Craig was being considered as the first Daniel to be cast to play James Bond, I could argue, “But why does he need to step into this role, which has been previously established as a non-Daniel role? There should be more opportunities written specifically for people named Daniel, especially Daniels of color, because Daniels have such a unique perspective and so much to offer.” And then, of course, we would cast Frank Stallone.The point is that there’s huge cultural cachet already invested in the character of “James Bond”, and there will continue to be James Bond movies made until the sun burns out, so giving disadvantaged portions of the population access to that cultural currency is important. Whereas creating new characters that “highlight women’s unique perspective” has (like most creative endeavors!) a low chance of success and a high chance of being written off.If these gatekeepers were to say “No, we don’t want to do that because most of these gender-flipped deals kind of suck” that would be closer to honest. But again, most movies suck.
That’s a rather poor analogy. What’s a “non-Daniel role”? The name of an actor has very little to do with the character, but it would be difficult for a black actor to play Bond without the character being black, unless in-universe he’s just doing blackface or something. (Also, in a world where people named Daniel face oppression, why would people name their child “Daniel”?)
Yeah if you name your kid Daniel in a Daniel-oppressed world, that’s just throwing them to the lions!
How many people named their kids Karen this year?
perhaps my analogy is poor, or perhaps you’re just doing a poor job at being prejudiced against Daniels. Makes you think, doesn’t it?No, wait, sorry, it doesn’t.
Exactly. Unless someone like Nolan or Spielberg pursues it, getting an original, female-lead movie with the budget and scope of a Bond film (No Time To Die cost $300 million) into production is a tall order.
ATOMIC BLONDE already did this pretty well.
I was thinking exactly that. ‘Why can’t a woman be Bond?’ ‘Women should have their own roles created for them’ ‘So, you’re creating one?’ ‘Heavens no, I meant hypothetically’.
That is just waste. The superior Mission Impossible movies are made for half that budget and every one has a much more memorable set piece. Atomic Blond was made for 30. Lucy 40. Point being I dont know but damn that is wasteful.
i made this point above but when craig was cast people were furious that a blonde man was james bond. everyone is stupid.
The point is that there’s huge cultural cachet already invested in the character of “James Bond”, and there will continue to be James Bond movies made until the sun burns out, so giving disadvantaged portions of the population access to that cultural currency is important.I mean, do you not trust the disadvantaged portions of the population to create their own cultural currency?
I mean, do you not trust the disadvantaged portions of the population to create their own cultural currency?You’re completely eliding the force of the dominant cultural hegemony in actively denying disadvantaged groups the ability to do so. Not to mention the entire history of the co-option of cultural trends created by black and other minority groups that are then exploited in service of white
Forging representation and letting others into white and male dominated spaces is always going to take active effort. And while having a non-male or white James Bond is perhaps one of the stupider examples, the reflexive way that people find excuses not to consider it is pretty much the kind of resistance that illustrates my point.
The “if [x] was changed, would James Bond still be James Bond?” argument is weaker here than with most franchises. It’s not like movie Bond has borne even a passing resemblance to Flemming’s almost aged-out, bennie-popping, air conditioning hating, bourbon swilling, WWII vet racist weirdo for a long time.
I want an exact replica-Bond where he is not the good guy and everyone hates him, especially women.
Alan Moore wrote a character like that, “Jimmy Bond” in his “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen” comic series. Not to be confused with the awful movie adaptation. But yeah, he has syphilis and cirrhosis and was a rapist and was also inept at his job. Basically like what would happen if a real life spy tried to be James Bond.
The villain of that book was Harry Potter as well. League volume 3 was basically Moore taking out a lot of frustration he had with Western dude protagonists.
Holy shit, OG James Bond was Sterling Archer.
I think Adam Reed has explicitly stated that was the basic premise for Archer—James Bond, but in a (somewhat) more realistic world where people would reasonably find him annoying. Either that or that was the interpretation all the TV critics at the time took. ETA (from a GQ interview with Adam Reed): I kept thinking more about the spy thing. I was like, “How can we sort of turn this genre on its head?” Because it has been done so many times. But years and years ago, a friend gave me a collection of all the James Bond novels, original first-edition paperbacks, with these lurid pulp covers on them. And I started reading those, and I had never read them before, and it was like, page one—this guy is a dick! He’s a troubled man, and he’s incredibly misogynistic. There’s one scene—I forget which book it’s from, but basically what happens is rape. It’s like, “She protested, but then Bond twisted her hand behind her back and took his reward.” Like, what the shit?! So that got the wheels turning. I was like, “How can I make a spy character the shittiest dude in the world—that you still really sympathize with and root for?” That’s been sort of the driving thing.
Very few people are attached to the book version of the character. The version of the character defined by the movies, and especially by Sean Connery, is the one that people have a pretty strong attachment to. It’s challenging in any franchise to change the actor and have people accept him or her as the same character (Bond and Doctor Who are the franchises to do it the most repeatedly, but it has come up with all sorts of reboots). You can shift gradually in a certain direction and have people accept it (like, having Bond be less toxically masculine), but there is a limit to what people will tolerate before the franchise legacy becomes an anchor around the neck of the movie, rather than an asset (something that springs to mind is the Total Recall reboot, it was so dramatically worse in every way than the original that it would have been better off pretending to be something new).
A much better character HAS been created, and she was Elizabeth Jennings. She had hair like one of the Vidal Sassoon models and she smoked like a chimney.She was way different than James Bond and way, WAY more compelling.
My biggest concern about a female Bond would be the poor woman gets the Dr. Who treatment: interesting and talented star stuck with such terrible writing that you’re certain they’ll go right back to a male actor the first chance they get. I’m sure the same thing will happen to Becky Harmon if she ever gets a chance to head coach an NBA team – probably get saddled with the Knicks or Cavs or somebody and they’ll blame the female coach for the team being a dumpster fire.
She should coach the Spurs damnit
This is a known phenomenon known as the “glass cliff”:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_cliff
He’s obviously correct.However, “Bond” movies are going to going to continue forever (or, at least as long as they are profitable). Should Bond be white and male always, on the grounds that “we should create better parts”? While I believe he’s sincere, this sounds a lot like the people who get butthurt over a black Spiderman and whatnot.
I’m not trying to split hairs but this would be like if they got a Black guy to play Peter Parker, instead of inventing a whole new Spider Man, Miles Morales, and having him exist while Peter Parker also exists. A whole new role created specifically for a PoC instead of thrusting the actor into a role with a ton of baggage that includes Bond originally being a racist and supporting the last vestiges of imperialism in the British empire, their global influence etc. So, I think Craig would rather writers go the Miles Morales route, rather than just having a Black actor playing a traditionally White character, it might result in less backlash too, such as what Zendaya got for playing MJ as a non-White redhead or what I’m sure Lashana Lynch will receive for taking Bond’s 00 numbers in this film.
But going the Miles Morales route *is* what they’re doing with Lashana Lynch’s character isn’t it? She’s not James Bond, like how Miles isn’t Peter Parker, but she is inheriting the title of 007, like how Miles is still Spider-Man. I don’t disagree on the backlash aspect (or not wanting to deal with the icky baggage of James Bond), but the other side of that coin is there are other people think it’d be kind of fun to see a big established franchise shake things up.
I want to say people are calling for a female 007, and they mean James Bond metaphorically as the 007 type of spy. Otherwise it just doesn’t really make sense.And to those getting mad that there is a female 007 in the upcoming film-they had female 00 agents in the older films, you wankers!
Sort of, it is like if Miles only existed in the Spider Man books as a supporting character with Parker getting the top billing, instead of having his own entire series that exists without Parker necessarily being around or influencing Miles. Like it can be “Miles Morales: Spider-Man” with a clean break and a fresh start instead of, like, taking over for Parker because he died (which is kind of what happened in the comics before he got his own series).
Yeah I don’t exactly get what a female James Bond would be. Does she still have the name like she’s Michael Burnham or is she a female 007? A female 007 is where they’re going with the new movie anyway, which I think is fine. But James himself is very caught up in being male, English, and fucked up.
“Bond. Jane Bond.”I mean, it’s right there.
That’ll remind people too much of GI Jane
Greetings! I see that you are one of the three other people in the world who regularly spends brainpower remembering that G.I. Jane existed.
I don’t think we should forget. Not this. Someone has to remember
Sorry… Who has misconstrued Craig’s comments in the way described by the article?
I would take a guess that it’s someone on Twitter
Ah. Well, this IS a good point. All I’d seen was “Daniel Craig says a woman shouldn’t be James Bond.” But this is a much more nuanced take, and he’s probably right. I think it WOULD be far more interesting to have an entirely new thing rather than, “It’s 007, but a giiiiiiirl!”
Another thing I wish people would consider is how much worse women and POC generally have it when it comes to online harassment and “fan” interactions in general, and it seems to be much worse when there’s gender- or race-swaping involved. Sometimes, a character isn’t swapped and it’s awful anyway (see Brie Larson and Captain Marvel) but creating a new character reduces the chances things will degenerate.
I agree with Craig, for a while there I used to think an amiable compromise would be to have a female “00″ agent introduced in a Bond film, much like they’re doing with Lashana Lynch’s character in this one, and then give her a spin-off if she was well-received by fans and critics.
However, now I’d much rather see an “Atomic Blonde” style movie where the lead character does some Bond-esque stuff, like slick fight scenes and sexy intrigue with love interests, but with none of the baggage or expectations of it being a gender-flipped Bond. Less backlash from sexists, I mean, people who are merely obsessed with their childhoods and want to keep things “the way they were” and totally aren’t sexist, or racist, but somehow only show up to raise a fuss when a person who isn’t a middle aged white guy gets a juicy role.
Makes me think: you could totally do a gender flipped George Smiley. Give Olivia Colman a couple of years.
ahh that’d be perfect. Though even in a few years I think she’ll still be too pretty for the role. My main takeaway from the books is that Smiley is unattractive and overweight, hence why his enemies and also random people overlook him and underestimate him, cause they think he’s a putz.
Did you ever see Green Wing? Her frazzled mom from that would have been the perfect cover for George Smiley.
They’ve already done that with The Night Manager. Her character was a guy in the book.
I totally forgot she was in the TV version of The Night Manager! Not only gender-flipped but pregnant.
The real question is, could a woman pull off stepping into the role of James Bond Jr? No easy feat, that.
Much like with Anthony Mackie: good point that could be taken the wrong way when said in a clunky manner or removed of context. We need more non-white male centered action/adventure stories. We need good ones, ones that are not wholly reliant on well-known gender and racial action tropes (ex: murdered child, daddy issues, t&a, flagrantly racist to the point of parodied bad guys, girl power fight scenes, blatant One of the Good Ones…). We need to back more creatives in the book and screenplay arena and have directors and producers willing to pay for and direct these things. Sure, with a competent team a female 007 can be great, but we really need the next Sir Ian Fleming
Seconded
Any time you try and keep a franchise alive by bringing in a new actor to play an existing character, there is a tremendous risk of alienating your fan base. I think it’s wrong to think of this as like a women’s equality / girl power thing, it’s a question of how you tap into the sentimentality and affection for an existing franchise to make an entertaining product, when you’re not able to use the same actor(s). Let’s take Star Trek as an analog for this (a franchise that is about the same age as Bond). When the Original Series cast got too old and too expensive, they elected to go the “next generation” route, casting new characters within the same universe, rather than recasting the original characters with younger and cheaper actors. And that worked fantastically well, Next Generation had a slew of characters and relationships that became iconic in their own right, and set a template for expanding the universe even further (expansion that continues to this day). What’s good about Star Trek as an analogy is that we also got to experience a reboot of the original cast, with the JJ Abrams movies. And he did such a fantastic job with casting that the new actors were accepted, but it had a lot to do with the fact that they captured the spirit and charisma of the original performers. It was a slightly different take on the characters, but they were recognizably familiar. Much the same can be said of the successful Bond actors, and the popular reincarnations of the Doctor in Doctor Who. They capture some familiar essence of the character through the body of a different performer.So what then is the takeaway as it relates to the future of Bond? First, I think it’s right to be afraid of changing the character too much, because if they are not recognizably familiar as the character we’ve grown to know and love over 50 years of movies, then fans will feel betrayed and actively hate the movie. Second, expanding the universe with new characters is a very valid option.I personally have a hard time envisioning a female version of James Bond that is still recognizably James Bond. Bond’s masculinity and heterosexuality are among his most defining traits. I’d contrast that with the Doctor of Doctor Who, who is somewhat asexual, or in more modern/adventurous episodes, pansexual. Gender fluidity is well within the scope of the Doctor as we knew him before he was recast as a woman. Similarly, I don’t think race is an essential trait of Bond, in any way, and I could very easily envision a Black Bond. So basically I think the producers have it right.
I personally have a hard time envisioning a female version of James Bond that is still recognizably James Bond. Bond’s masculinity and heterosexuality are among his most defining traits.Possibily butch definitely lesbian top Jane Bond I could very very easily envision and I’d be entirely down for it.
I would never be opposed to an unorthodox interpretation of Bond (it’s a fictional character in a work of fiction — you could literally make the next Bond goddamn Shrek and it wouldn’t fucking matter to anyone but a bunch of immeasurably boring cinema dorks) but Craig’s definitely not wrong. I can see why some might interpret his comments as him trying to deflect away from a “no, only people like me get to play Bond” opinion, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here.Endlessly reinventing the same characters and stories over and over again just so marginalized folks can maybe, maybe have a chance of picking up some scraps does kind of suck, in a lot of ways. I mean, it is cool that Sam Wilson is the new Captain America and is getting his own movie, but will it be better than Black Panther overall? I hope so, but I’m not holding my breath.
“The name’s Bechdel, James Bechdel”
There are only two qualifications for Bond: one is to be extremely attractive and the other to seduce hot women. Thus, a lesbian Bond is definitely a possibility.
when I saw the last Mad Max and watched how Max was more or less a supporting character to Furiosa, James Bond was the first movie I thought of where it would be interesting to do the same thing, but given how loathe the James Bond producers are to change, and how the fanboys lost their shit when a blonde (albeit the guy who turned out to be the best Bond IMO) was “christened” as James Bond, I won’t hold my breath waiting for a change of that magnitude.
Like Charlize Theron in Atomic Blonde. She was a great Bond-style spy, good movie, better plot than a lot of Bond movies. (If Bond were a woman, would she have to spell it Bonde?)
Counter-AVClub Hot Take:It is completely ok if James Bond remains a white British guy.
I agree with him. I’m not the biggest Miles Morales fan as I didn’t think we needed a brown Spider-man (I’m Brown myself) and I will watch the Black Superman movie but how about we start making new characters that become part of our history for POC and women.He is 007, so maybe 004 is a women who is better than him and doesn’t mention Bond or you know something way better than that.
Well, Miles Morales and Peter Parker are different characters.
People shit on the roger moore bond, but that camp is the best of it. Let bond be an era character. He does spy shit, has gadgets, and goes through women. Sometimes those women are badasses as well. DONE.
This seems to be the consensus nowadays but, just to say, I’d roll with it if they cast a woman as Bond. If fans can get through Die Another Day, they can get through a change like that just fine.
I don’t get why people are clamoring to be footnotes in a long line of white men rather than carving out something original. As a black man, I want more Black Panthers with their own lineages and identities, not one measly Black Batman that’s a needle in a haystack.