Next you will be telling me you want Will Smith to be the next bond or Daniel Craig to play Malcolm X.
I agree that the actor should have the appearance and characteristics as written in the books.
(otherwise it bears nor relation to the original story and characters.)
M in the books is a fatherly head of the secret service, who is grumpy and has "damnably clear grey eyes".
Felix Leiter is a similar age to Bond and in LALDie has straw-coloured blonde hair.
Loses half a leg and an arm, which has not been evident for ages in the films.
For the films newly created characters are usual but try not to change the originals too much.
Next you will be telling me you want Will Smith to be the next bond or Daniel Craig to play Malcolm X.
Your problem with M being Black?
That depends would you have an issue with jason Statham playing Dr King?. Fleming defined the character he created, I just think you have to cast to part and that does include ethnic roots. For example you couldnt have Rihanna playing Stephen Hakins in a biopic. Its not sexist or racial prejudice its just if a parts already defined and its disrespectful to the creative artist who created the character. My wife is mixed race. I don't have a prejudice bone in my body so I take offence to your small minded response. Again my point is simple creative art is that of its creator, that should be respected and protected free from political correctness and "just to drawn in a greater audience". Naomi Watts mixed race, Felix lighter now played by a mixed race actor both great actors their charchters were not defined enough in the novels so it works.
I never suggested that you are racist or prejudiced. My "small minded" response was merely to ask why having a Black M would be a problem for you. Your example of having Jason Statham play Martin Luther King is really just a red herring, if you ask me. Dr. King was a real person who lived a real life as an African-American man who was an important figure during the civil rights era. It would be ludicrous to have Statham play that role just as it would be ludicrous to have Denzel Washington play Sir Winston Churchill. And your Rihanna example is just as outlandish in my opinion. I realize that M and the other characters in the Bond novels were depicted as caucasian Brits, but except for Bond himself, I'd don't think it would do any harm to the Bond films to change the ethnic background or even the gender of certain characters from time to time. I. for one, was not bothered at all by the fact that M was changed to a woman. I think it worked superbly in the capable hands of Dame Judi Dench, and believe there are probably several skilled Black actors who could do just as well.
After a quick think I believe I agree with you, BL. Any character other than Bond could be played by an actor/actress who isn't white. That said, I think with a black Leiter and black Moneypenny there is no need at this time to make more of the regular cast non-white.
Getting the best actor/actress is the key, but the regular cast certainly reflects the multi-ethnic UK of today.
After a quick think I believe I agree with you, BL. Any character other than Bond could be played by an actor/actress who isn't white. That said, I think with a black Leiter and black Moneypenny there is no need at this time to make more of the regular cast non-white.
Getting the best actor/actress is the key, but the regular cast certainly reflects the multi-ethnic UK of today.
We can’t have the creators stick to the characteristics described in the books! If they did, all Bond movies would have to be set the 1960’s. The world has changed since then, and even the cinematic Bond himself is very different from Fleming’s literary one. If he and Moneypenny can be so drastically re-defined, then I don’t get why M could not.
I also don't get why Bond would have to be forever white. How about an Indian Bond, for instance? I would welcome that.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,580Chief of Staff
I don't know if this helps, but I think it's a good analogy:
In the early episodes of the Jack Ryan series by Tom Clancy, M's equivalent is Admiral James Greer. A white man in the books, he was played in the films by James Earl Jones who was perfect in the role- paternal, authoritative, you name it- and exactly what an M should be. The right actor got the part.
I don't know if this helps, but I think it's a good analogy:
In the early episodes of the Jack Ryan series by Tom Clancy, M's equivalent is Admiral James Greer. A white man in the books, he was played in the films by James Earl Jones who was perfect in the role- paternal, authoritative, you name it- and exactly what an M should be. The right actor got the part.
I don't know if this helps, but I think it's a good analogy:
In the early episodes of the Jack Ryan series by Tom Clancy, M's equivalent is Admiral James Greer. A white man in the books, he was played in the films by James Earl Jones who was perfect in the role- paternal, authoritative, you name it- and exactly what an M should be. The right actor got the part.
That character had not been defined in film for the last 50 years as an elderly white man like M has been. I never said there should not be black actor playing white story character's my argument is if the character has been long established then to change the race would make no sense and it so far removed from the character Fleming created. Your analogy is good but it didn't rebuttle the point I was making.
You only live twice: Once when you are born. And once when you look death in the face.
Well, making M a woman after 30 years of being a man did no harm at all. It was very clear that this was not the same character but a different individual holding the same position* who just happened to be female. M is Bond's parent figure as well as his boss- underlined more with Dench and Craig than earlier in the series- which again is carried off well in the Ryan/Greer relationship (especially when Greer dies and Ryan assumes his job).
Male, female, black, white...
* when Brown replaced Lee it was never clear if he was playing the same man or his successor.
my argument is if the character has been long established then to change the race would make no sense and it so far removed from the character Fleming created
My question would be, how would it hurt the film series? Both Felix Leiter and M were changed from the original characters, and as far as I can see it didn't hurt much, if at all.
But my whole original post was about the fact I did not want Dench in the reboot. It made no sense she should have gone with the Brosnan error. M is not a parent figure. Have you read the novel's. M recruited Bond because he saw the good in him he knows hes a rough diamond who gets the job done. Dench's M did potray some of this but their was to much of the mother and son relationship. Its based on Flemings own time in Naval intelligence his commander Rear Admiral John Godfrey who took a punt on Fleming knowing he was a rough diamond but struggled to keep him under control. I am a fan of the novel and how Fleming defined them. Would you paint a moustache on the Mona Lisa? its art and someone's intellectual property. If you write script or cast for Bond you are a custodian of Flemings work and I think some things should be kept as is. Someone said it best we have a mix raced Moneypenny and felix there is no need to make further changes it represents the mixed cultures in British society of today.
You only live twice: Once when you are born. And once when you look death in the face.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,580Chief of Staff
M is not a parent figure. Have you read the novel's. M recruited Bond because he saw the good in him he knows hes a rough diamond who gets the job done.
You could argue that that is exactly what being a parent is about...but I don't think that you can argue about the M of the novels...Sir Miles is every inch the parent to Bond.
And that is exactly what has happened. Some things have been keep the same and some have not. I guess the difference is in which things one believes should forever remain unchanged. Apparently you believe that the race or gender of certain characters falls into the category of things that should remain unchanged. That's your opinion and I don't think anyone can argue that your opinion is right or wrong. Nor do I see anyone commenting that you are somehow racist or sexist for holding that opinion. My opinion is that the changes that have been made so far have not harmed the series.
I've been reading them for damn near fifty years and practically have them memorised. As said above, Sir Miles Messervy functions as Bond's father figure in a clear way. And yes, I was already aware of who Admiral Godfrey was, too. There isn't anything in the novels about M recruiting Bond. And Brosnan was an asset, not an error.
{[] That's the beauty of AJB, we can all have different opinions, although
Some times we all agree but we can always be friends -{
With all opinions there are no right or wrong ones. ( except mine, but I think
Most people accept that ) -{
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,580Chief of Staff
I've been reading them for damn near fifty years and practically have them memorised. As said above, Sir Miles Messervy functions as Bond's father figure in a clear way. And yes, I was already aware of who Admiral Godfrey was, too. There isn't anything in the novels about M recruiting Bond. And Brosnan was an asset, not an error.
Comments
which should keep things interesting.
I agree that the actor should have the appearance and characteristics as written in the books.
(otherwise it bears nor relation to the original story and characters.)
M in the books is a fatherly head of the secret service, who is grumpy and has "damnably clear grey eyes".
Felix Leiter is a similar age to Bond and in LALDie has straw-coloured blonde hair.
Loses half a leg and an arm, which has not been evident for ages in the films.
For the films newly created characters are usual but try not to change the originals too much.
Bleuville.
I never suggested that you are racist or prejudiced. My "small minded" response was merely to ask why having a Black M would be a problem for you. Your example of having Jason Statham play Martin Luther King is really just a red herring, if you ask me. Dr. King was a real person who lived a real life as an African-American man who was an important figure during the civil rights era. It would be ludicrous to have Statham play that role just as it would be ludicrous to have Denzel Washington play Sir Winston Churchill. And your Rihanna example is just as outlandish in my opinion. I realize that M and the other characters in the Bond novels were depicted as caucasian Brits, but except for Bond himself, I'd don't think it would do any harm to the Bond films to change the ethnic background or even the gender of certain characters from time to time. I. for one, was not bothered at all by the fact that M was changed to a woman. I think it worked superbly in the capable hands of Dame Judi Dench, and believe there are probably several skilled Black actors who could do just as well.
Getting the best actor/actress is the key, but the regular cast certainly reflects the multi-ethnic UK of today.
He could have played Princess Grace, if he'd wanted.
Excuse me for throwing in a Suggestion then 8-)
I agree.
I also don't get why Bond would have to be forever white. How about an Indian Bond, for instance? I would welcome that.
Then you change the whole dynamic and you have a completely different character - not Bond. Changing Bond's nationality is ludicrous...
Thank you!. It would be like having Ice Cube play Jon McClane in Die Hard 5. It just wouldnt make sense to those who love the franchise.
In the early episodes of the Jack Ryan series by Tom Clancy, M's equivalent is Admiral James Greer. A white man in the books, he was played in the films by James Earl Jones who was perfect in the role- paternal, authoritative, you name it- and exactly what an M should be. The right actor got the part.
Precisely! {[]
That character had not been defined in film for the last 50 years as an elderly white man like M has been. I never said there should not be black actor playing white story character's my argument is if the character has been long established then to change the race would make no sense and it so far removed from the character Fleming created. Your analogy is good but it didn't rebuttle the point I was making.
Male, female, black, white...
* when Brown replaced Lee it was never clear if he was playing the same man or his successor.
My question would be, how would it hurt the film series? Both Felix Leiter and M were changed from the original characters, and as far as I can see it didn't hurt much, if at all.
You could argue that that is exactly what being a parent is about...but I don't think that you can argue about the M of the novels...Sir Miles is every inch the parent to Bond.
And that is exactly what has happened. Some things have been keep the same and some have not. I guess the difference is in which things one believes should forever remain unchanged. Apparently you believe that the race or gender of certain characters falls into the category of things that should remain unchanged. That's your opinion and I don't think anyone can argue that your opinion is right or wrong. Nor do I see anyone commenting that you are somehow racist or sexist for holding that opinion. My opinion is that the changes that have been made so far have not harmed the series.
I've been reading them for damn near fifty years and practically have them memorised. As said above, Sir Miles Messervy functions as Bond's father figure in a clear way. And yes, I was already aware of who Admiral Godfrey was, too. There isn't anything in the novels about M recruiting Bond. And Brosnan was an asset, not an error.
So in future why not have a black M, or a new female Q.
We just need to agree to disagree guys.
Some times we all agree but we can always be friends -{
With all opinions there are no right or wrong ones. ( except mine, but I think
Most people accept that
We do, TP....we accept that you are always wrong -{
+ 1