• Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

Action-Adventure The 26th James Bond Film

How to continue the Bond Franchise?

  • Reboot everything

    Votes: 53 67.1%
  • New Bond actor, same cast

    Votes: 15 19.0%
  • Keep the code name but pass it on to someone else

    Votes: 6 7.6%
  • Kill the franchise

    Votes: 5 6.3%

  • Total voters
    79
Is it possible to address the ethnicity thing without sounding racist? I like characters to be faithful to source material so for that reason I don’t want a female playing 007, or a black or Asian James Bond, or whatever. The character is a white, British Caucasian male. For the record, I also don’t want a white man playing Black Panther or 3 young dudes in the next remake of Charlie’s Angels. Race or gender doesn’t bother me one bit, but accuracy does.
It is possible, but most of the time those that want to address it...simply do it for Racist reasons...even if its just underlying racism.

Literally the only two important Identification aspects of James Bond, are that he is british and male...the rest is relative unimportant in terms of his Appearance.

While as often said, its vital to the character of Black Panther to be Black.
Which is simply often the case for Black Characters, because they were often created to embrace what a racist society told them they cant embrace...being black.

We as society and in this day and age have too many people ill equipped to have such a discussion unfortunately.
There is already more outrage at the Snape casting in 2-3 days, than there ever was when Marvel didnt cast a Romani actor for Doctor Doom for example.
That is because the debate about "Race swapping" characters more often than not is bothering people when it goes it includes more POC representation, not the other way around.
 
Truth is, it all depends on the acting and the movie. Let me tell you, if they hire a black actor that makes a horrible Bond and/or the movie is bad, people are gonna be maaaaad. On the contrary, if he makes a fantastic Bond and/or the movie is actually great, is gonna look like a brilliant move. Ethnicity is not the issue. Nor the color of the hair. Or the eyes. We've been through this with Daniel Craig.
 
Last edited:
Truth is, it all depends on the acting and the movie. Let me tell you, if they hire a black actor that makes a horrible Bond and/or the movie is bad, people are gonna be maaaaad. On the contrary, if he makes a fantastic Bond and/or the movie is actually great, is gonna look like a brilliant move. Ethnicity is not the issue. Nor the color of the hair. Or the eyes. We've been trough this with Daniel Craig.
I second all of this.
 
I don't know, I think there's potential for a Bond that's ethnically from a former British colony, and how his heritage and background conflict with his mission of furthering Britain's imperial agenda. Amazon would never do this because they're cowards, but under the right filmmaker who handled the concept deftly and with care it could be interesting.

That said, the most likely option is that we get someone like Henry Cavill, the safest option imaginable to appease loud Internet bros, even though they don't represent the general audience.
Modern Britain is far more ethnically diverse than it used to be so contemporary MI5/MI6 Agents being non-white wouldn't be an issue. It's pretty well known that MI5/MI6 actively tried to recruit more diverse staff from the nineties onward.

The Bond character was from a specific era in time when the national espionage agencies recruited specific types of people (usually old money oxbridge types). It was mentioned in the Brosnan and Craig's Bond movies that they are relics of a bygone era.
 
for those saying Henry is too old to be 007, remember Pierce was 41 when he did his first film, and Roger was 46 when he did his. and Henry is in such good shape his age should not matter just saying.
 
for those saying Henry is too old to be 007, remember Pierce was 41 when he did his first film, and Roger was 46 when he did his. and Henry is in such good shape his age should not matter just saying.
It's more a matter of him being too famous than anything else.
 
Too famous? Henry isn’t exactly known for a string of Hollywood hits.
The fact that he was Superman is enough. That was a much higher profile role than any of the previous Bond actors had before they got the role. There are a few reasons why Cavill won't be the next Bond but that one's the most obvious.
 
for those saying Henry is too old to be 007, remember Pierce was 41 when he did his first film, and Roger was 46 when he did his. and Henry is in such good shape his age should not matter just saying.
It's more a matter of him being too famous than anything else.
Being a plank of wood doesn’t help either.
 
Yeah even putting acting ability, or lack thereof aside, the boy just does not wear suits well. And this is Bond, James Bond, we're talking about here!
 
There's many things I like about Henry Cavill. Not a single one of them makes him equipped to be a good James Bond. Let alone a great one.
 
The next Bond will probably b somebody that we have never heard of.
Eh, he'll have been around. Its hard to predict now because its totally different people handling it but historically he'll be a somewhat recognizable British supporting actor.
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"