It’s been over ten years since Casino Royale and the debut of Daniel Craig as James Bond, which means we’re overdue for a new 007. The British tabloid the Daily Star published a rumor that Bond producer Barbara Broccoli thought it was time some diversity was brought to the role and director Antoine Fuqua suggested that Idris Elba was his top choice.
Elba himself has publicly campaigned for the role for years, in 2011 saying “I’d not only get in the cab, but I’d take the taxi driver out of the car, hostage. The taxi, jump out while it was moving, jump onto a pedal bike that was just past the door as I got on it, and then get onto a plane—on the wing—land on top of Sony Studios, slide through the air conditioning, and land in the office.” And he further added fuel to the fire on Sunday by tweeting, “my name’s Elba, Idris Elba.”
Now, all of this “news” is purely guesswork. There’s been no official announcement, but it’s hard to think of an actor better suited to play Bond than Elba. He’s English, mid-forties, and known for being famously, irresistibly handsome. He has a distinguished career playing characters who are equal parts charming and menacing, such as drug kingpin Stringer Bell on The Wire and apocalypse canceller Marshal Stacker Pentecost in Pacific Rim. And he has a fun social media presence that allows him to engage with his fans while playing on his larger-than-life persona.
So: the only “problem” with Elba taking on the role of Bond is his skin color. There are many 007 “fans” that will not accept a black James Bond. For these (let’s just say it) racists, a Bond of African descent just can’t work; as Rush Limbaugh put it, “James Bond is a total concept put together by Ian Fleming. He was white and Scottish. Period. That is who James Bond is.”
To these people, a black Bond is unacceptable because, at his heart, Bond is a straight white male power fantasy, a reactionary counter to the end of the British empire and the rise of civil rights movements around the world. As former colonies became their own countries with power to rival Great Britain, and women and racial minorities were claiming their place at the table, it was comforting to believe that only a white man, drinking and screwing his way around the globe, could actually save the world.
This reactionary fantasy is even present in 1995’s Goldeneye, where M correctly identifies Bond as “a sexist, misogynist dinosaur. A relic of the Cold War.” The moral of Goldeneye, then, is that the world needs a misogynist dinosaur to save it and that it’s not Bond who has to change with the times: it’s the world that has to accept him.
But the fact is that Bond has constantly changed over the last fifty years. 007 hasn’t been played by a Scot since Sean Connery, and it’s impossible for any Bond since Timothy Dalton’s to be literally the same character as the one in From Russia with Love (unless some sort of regeneration is going on, but let’s not go there right now).
Even when the same actor plays Bond for a period of time, he shifts his characterization over the course of his tenure. Connery’s Bond in Dr. No is a drunk screw-up, the kind of agent who gets sent to Jamaica because a scientist has wandered off, and two films later he’s a suave superman sent to foil the greatest gold theft in history. Craig’s Bond in Casino Royale is a brutal thug uncomfortable in the high class world of Le Chiffre, and two films later he’s a suave superman coming out of retirement to save MI6.
It’s inevitable that a new Bond will not adhere to Ian Fleming’s “total concept.” By casting Idris Elba (or another actor of color), Broccoli and Fuqua can blow up the racist heart of the Bond films—the flawed tenet that only a white man can save the world. That only a white man can be smart, strong, sophisticated, and suave enough to be a super spy. That only the people who have always controlled the world can continue to save it.
I’d say that casting Elba would drag Bond into the 21st century, but the fact is this radical rebranding of Bond should have happened twenty years ago. The response to “you’re a misogynist dinosaur” shouldn’t ever be “you’re right and I’m proud.” It should be to say, “Holy shit, you’re right, I’d better get with the times.”
With that in mind, casting Elba (who, again, I think would be a great choice to play the part), might not be going far enough. Why not a woman? Why not someone queer? Craig campaigned for Bond to have a homosexual romance for years, all of which amounted to one throwaway line in Skyfall. Bond is a power fantasy, will always be a power fantasy, but why should he remain a fantasy for just a straight white male minority? Shouldn’t everybody get to play at getting drunk, getting laid, and saving the world—and looking amazing while doing it?
Steven Padnick is a freelance writer and editor. By day. You can find more of his writing and funny pictures at padnick.tumblr.com.
“With that in mind, casting Elba (who, again, I think would be a great choice to play the part), might not be going far enough. Why not a woman? Why not someone queer?“
How about a queer woman of color? I’m not even joking, I think it would be fantastic. I just can’t think of any British queer actresses of color off hand. Hopefully someone else is more knowledgeable.
@1, there’s Pearl Mackie who played Bill Potts in Doctor Who. Not sure if she is queer, but her character was, and she sold it well if she isn’t.
I’ve been on the Elba-for-Bond bandwagon for years and years….would be very happy if something finally came from it. Craig is “my” Bond, but gosh I think Elba would be just as good if not better.
Casting Idris as Bond would be better than going with Doctor Who route, I guess.
Trouble is he’ll just be a black Craig in his style. That is really not enough of a change, they need someone more stylish and suave who can handle some humour and tech. Someone less burly and aggro. It won’t be him being black that keeps me away, it’ll be him being “badass” instead of charming. Still, could be a lot lot worse.
He might make a great Bond, I was never a fan of Daniel Craig as Bond, Whoever plays the roll needs to be appealing to both men and women.
With that said why would we chose an actor for the roll by anything other then who is best for the part? Who cares if it is a woman, sexual orientation, race?
“Who cares if it is a woman, sexual orientation, race?”
All the people who are fed up with heroes always defaulting to middle-aged white males? I am one (a MAWM, not a hero), and I’m still tired of it.
I say if Idris Elba can’t be Doctor Who, he should definitely be Bond.
Bond is only Scottish because Connery made such an impact in the role. Ian Fleming famously hated the idea of Connery playing Bond but after seeing him in the first couple of films, he made Bond part Scottish to celebrate Connery.
In terms of Idris Elba, my only issue with him is his age. If Craig had stepped away after the last one Elba would have been fine but he’ll be 50 by the time he makes his debut at this rate. My preferred choice would be either Chiwetel Ejiofor or Tom Hiddleston for the next Bond
Elba would undoubtedly bring a lot to the character, whether played (relatively) straight like Craig’s initial take or more broadly like Moore, but still – all the Bonds (so far, at least) have played the character as a man in his 30s or 40s, and quite capable (however unbelievably) at his profession.
if they really wanted to do something different – and with a character that is pretty much “set” at least for the franchise audience – then maybe an origin story with a much younger person playing the part of Bond and learning the ropes, so to speak, before joining the intelligence service, or a requiem (presumably with Craig as Bond) where a life founded on brutality comes to an end, and Craig’s character passes the torch.
The current Moneypenny is played as a young British woman of color; maybe try doing something with her going into the field with Craig’s character, and she takes up the cause after he dies/retires/whatever … don’t know if that would work for the business side of it, but at least it would be different than “suave super spy etc.” iteration number 8 or whatever.
Granted, either of the above ideas would go against what has been a pretty successful formula, but it would be something different, at least.
Maybe it’s because I’ve only seen him in Luther, but I have trouble imaging Elba being suave enough to play Bond. If we’re gonna have a black Bond, I’d rather see Chiwetel Ejiofor.
Personally I think a non-white Bond could work just fine, but I think a female Bond might not. The womanising is such a huge part of Bond’s character, and it’s a very masculine flaw; I’m not sure you could make it work even with a lesbian Bond; I just can’t imagine a hypothetical Jane Bond making the same kinds of lust-driven mistakes as the male version. Though I’m always happy to be proven wrong.
That said, I do wonder why there’s this move to race/genderbend established characters written by white guys rather than just creating a new franchise about a non-white/non-male spy, perhaps based on some books written by a non-white/non-male author who could probably use the extra exposure.
God knows the Fleming estate doesn’t need any more money.
Bond as a character is usually just a blank slate attached to a plot with no real history. It’s the perfect opportunity to cast just about anyone in the role.
1) Idris Elba as Bond? Hell yes!
2)
This misses the fact that James Bond is not a person–“James Bond” is a job title. It’s assigned to MI-6’s top assassin, and it gets passed along every time the occupant gets killed in action. They all pretend to be the same guy to create a fearsome myth in the criminal underworld…
“That said, I do wonder why there’s this move to race/genderbend established characters written by white guys rather than just creating a new franchise about a non-white/non-male spy, perhaps based on some books written by a non-white/non-male author who could probably use the extra exposure.
God knows the Fleming estate doesn’t need any more money.”
Hear, hear.
I’ve on board of this casting for ages! Please, make it happen!
@9/Crane Excellent point about the trend of franchises trying to take profit of low risk and look edgy and addressing diversity. Does that trend really helps representation of diverse voices in media?
Rather than Chiwetel or Elba, I think if we must have a Black Bond then Duane Henry ought to have the right acting style.
Given the UK’s population mix though any non-white Bond ought really to be an actor who is Indian Subcontinental or Chinese rather than anything else. So maybe it should be Dev Patel or someone new from the British-Chinese immigrant scene.
I think the one hurdle to clear that makes the difference between capturing the character and not is that he needs to be an education-glossed imperial ruffian; a public-school type.
@@@@@ 8 “Granted, either of the above ideas would go against what has been a pretty successful formula, but it would be something different, at least.“
The main audience focus for Bond movies are American males, and to be honest most of us American males are fairly shallow. The formula you speak of is fairly simple to appeal to that demographics, The film has to have lots of sexy women, filmed on exotic locations around the world, with tons of ‘boy toy’ cars and gadgets, have lots of action scenes and minimal graphic violence. Very tame and some would say very boring.
That formula has for the most part worked now for a good 50 years, sadly I don’t think a woman Bond works because it breaks that formula and I doubt any studio exec would take that chance.
EDIT ADDED:
@@@@@ 9 “rather than just creating a new franchise about a non-white/non-male spy, “
In the mid 60’s there was a good TV series called I Spy that had a white and black spy team that I thought worked real good and something along that line would work great for a new movie spy series.
I watch my first Bond film Goldfinger as a boy and loved them since, but they are starting to get stale and dated, it might be time to give Bond a rest.
Since everyone wants their ethnicity/gender/height represented, how about a shapechanger as James Bond?
Scytale is James Bond 007!
I am torn with this article. The author brings up a good point that it IS indeed time for a change in the Bond franchise. However, why must the conversation be between black and white? In western cinema, there yet (since Bruce Lee) to be an Asian cast in the lead role of an A list western production film. Period. Especially in a non campy dramatic action movie like the 007 franchise. Why must bond be English? If the intent is to make a paradigm shift, why not really rock the boat and make Bond an adopted American born former CIA operative crossed over to MI6 to be the new agent 007? Too much? Is society not yet ready for an Asian to be in a solo lead? Why are they always cast in a supporting role, emasculated and often killed early and in very gruesome ways. If an Asian IS cast in a co-star role, they are often the martial arts expert (Jet Li AND Bruce Lee) or some campy goofy comedic role (Ken Joeng and pretty much all Asian comics)….or both (Jackie Chan). Never the strong action hero or Bond type role….interesting. There are several Asian actors that are very good and would thrive in a role like that (e.g.,Daniel Dae Kim). I am extremely curious as to why the cinema culture has gone this way. If someone could objectively answer my curiosity without being racist, that would be great.
I also am in the camp that Elba would have made a great Bond if they had cast him ten years earlier. Given that his tenure as Bond might very well stretch ten years, will he still be up for the physicality of the role by the end?
To me, @random22 gets it right that if we want to change the ethnic background of Bond, Indian would be a great choice. However, I don’t like the portrayals of Bond as being super smooth and suave. I think he is at his best when he is a bit of a thug and misanthropist. Someone who maybe has a bit of a chip on his shoulder from being a scholarship student maybe. Or whose prospects for promotion in the Navy were limited, prompting a change to the foreign ministry.
I think an Idris Elba Bond is a cool idea. But isn’t it cruel to assume that people opposed to it are racists? That just feels like an extreme position to me. For example, I can imagine a white fan of both James Bond and Black Panther who would be angry at the idea of a black James Bond but also be mad about a white Black Panther. It’s not pro-white or anti-black, it’s being opposed to the change. I hope that makes sense. I don’t actually care enough either way to be able to empathize those hypothetical motives, I just feel like there has to be plenty of motives besides just racism.
You know, Bond works for a large organization and may be thinking of retirement. So cast Elba as 008, hopefully persuade Craig to appear as a partner and what you get is an I Spy type partnership, where the torch is passed to Elba for future movies, and his character is free of Bond’s baggage, including his attitude towards women.
Please keep the discussion civil and be constructive in your comments and criticism. The full moderation policy can be found here.
Idris Elba has stated repeatedly in the past that he does not want to play James Bond. Understandably, he does not want to be the “black Bond” that everyone would hoist him up as. Honestly, after Daniel Craig has finished his next film, the 007 series will probably be put on the back burner for a while. Because of how political things are no matter who they cast, the producers will get flack for it. Any black actor that is offered will now have the pressure of being the black Bond that will have to work even harder to impress because if they don’t do the role justice, good luck getting another role. They will be looked at as the person who is now required to make James Bond a black icon; they will crucified and they be cast aside. Who in their right mind would want that? Casting another white guy will result in the media and others tearing the guy apart for taking the role from a black person.
I’ve read almost all of the Fleming novels and, IIRC, James Bond *did* have Scottish heritage. England and Scotland have kind of a strained history (I’m sure the history experts on this site could explain it better than I can), so the concept of Bond being part of a demographic against which some people discriminate isn’t exactly new. Not to mention that the U.K. has a different (but also complicated) sense about racism against Black people than the U.S. does.
I personally kind of adore Idris Elba and think he should play EVERYONE, in EVERYTHING. ;) However, I think this castingmay be an internet rumour? I’ve read this on a bunch of other sites and it doesn’t seem like anything is actually confirmed.
16) – True, but a “young Bond” origin story doesn’t dispense with the formula, it simply approaches it from a different perspective that would at least allow a slightly more realistic and certainly gritty approach, and depending who lays the lead, could open up a new series.
Likewise, the “old Bond” requiem story allows for the formula, but could pass the torch to a new take on the Bondverse. Just spitballing here, but given the issues discussed by almost all the posters in response to the OP’s take on Elba, seems like a reinvention might be worth considering from the business side of the equation.
If they insist on making more Bond movies – I’d be happy to see them stop – then it’s certainly time to diversify the casting. Idris Elba? Sure. Why not? Doesn’t have to be someone of African heritage, either. Just someone non-white.
But…
Baby steps. Come on. Casting Elba would be far enough for now – it’s already asking a lot of your typical Bond viewer. You have to ease them in.
Idris Elba would not make a good Bond. I don’t care what color his skin is; white, black, whatever. I just don’t personally see him pulling the role off.
As others have said : Elba is too old to play Bond. It’s not just that he’d be 50 when he started (and not in particularly good shape); it’s a franchise, remember. He’d be pushing 60 when he finished. Remember Roger Moore ? We really want another Bond crawling all over women young enough to be his daughter?
What he could be, though, is the next Bond villain. They are always more interesting characters than Bond himself, they’ve had some great actors in th role over the years, and there hasn’t been a non white one since the Seventies. So forget Elba for Bond. Elba for Blofeld!
You know, unlike Doctor Who, who can literally be anyone, I just don’t think the Bond formula is that flexible. He’s like Superman. You want a female Superman? You get Supergirl. You want a black Superman? You get Steel. You don’t get the mainline Superman comic rebooting Clark Kent as a black woman, because that fundamentally changes an iconic character. In a crowded spy film market, there’s only so many ways you can tweak Bond before he stops being Bond. A queer Bond, a female Bond, would be so different as to hardly be Bond at all.
Also, Brosnan was the last Scottish Bond, not Connery.
Isn’t Bond basically Hyacinth Bucket with a pistol, someone who desperately wants to be part of the cultured set whose background precludes that from ever happening? But he’s useful so they tolerate him. So casting basically has a negative element: whatever background he has, it’s not one completely acceptable to the Best People.
For those who want a female Bond, I watched a movie in which the lead was a woman spy who was also a lesbian. The name of the movie is “Atomic Blonde”. A good spy movie that was, and there’s going to be a sequel. New characters with new stories might be better than changing legacy characters, which seems kind of lazy, but then again, Hollywood loves lazy stuff like reboots / soft reboots / making a movie out of something that already exists (books, TV series or even boardgames, I’m looking at you Battleship).
Total Elba fan here, and I’d just have to say I love the prospect of him playing “007” but not so much him playing “James Bond” (unless, of course, they actually do wind up integrating the fan theory about “James Bond” being a code name and make that explicit early on).
The conceit being that the “double-0” agents are a limited number (obviously 10 or fewer) of agents who have the famous license to kill, so obviously there would have to be multiple people embodying each number. Having Elba (or another minority candidate; love the suggestion of Daniel Dae Kim) take the role as the newest 007 would then allow the series to keep some continuity with the past (most likely with the Craig incarnation of the character) while tossing away all the baggage tied to cold war sensibilities and things from Fleming’s books, and tell brand new stories while still keeping the familiar parts such as Q and the gadgets.
And best of all, it would absolutely remove the arguments of anybody who insists that Bond must be white and Scottish.
@9 Carrie-Anne Moss as Jeri Hogarth in Jessica Jones did a good job as a lesbian having “masculine” relationship issues.
“Brosnan was the last Scottish Bond, not Connery.”
Pierce Brosnan is Irish. It’s a different country from Scotland.
Daniel DaeKim is American. Bond can’t be American.
#29
Aside from the lead, the Bond movies have been diverse for quite some time. Both Felix Leiter and Moneypenny are played by black actors now, and for about 15 years M was played by a woman, the wonderful Judi Dench, whose shadow still loomed large over the last movie.
Anyway, casting Elba would be continuing a trend.
“Plays” the lead, not “lays” …
In western cinema, there yet (since Bruce Lee) to be an Asian cast in the lead role of an A list western production film. Period.
Not at all. An Asian actor played the lead role in a massive, high-budget, highly successful Western film more than thirty years ago. It made massive box office, the critics loved it and it won eight Oscars.
I hate Daniel Craig as Bond. I would be willing to watch a set of six Chippendale dining chairs collectively play Bond before I’d watch him in another Bond film. Please Bond film makers, switch things up.
37. Dedic8ed
I’m not following your logic on the numbering of agents. Doesn’t the three digit number already imply that there could be up to 999 agents if needed? If there were only ten slots available they could just as well be 0-9 and only need a single digit.
@42 ajay
Please share which film you are referring to…?
Doesn’t the three digit number already imply that there could be up to 999 agents if needed? If there were only ten slots available they could just as well be 0-9 and only need a single digit.
In the lore of the James Bond books, all Secret Service officers are identified by a number (of up to four digits). Bond is one of three personnel in the Double-O Section (“licenced to kill”) all of whose numbers start 00. The books mention five others in total: 006, 008, 009 and 0011.
45: Gandhi, starring Ben Kingsley (né Krishna Pandit Bhanji).
I would be willing to watch a set of six Chippendale dining chairs collectively play Bond before I’d watch him in another Bond film. Please Bond film makers, switch things up.
I would be willing to watch a Bond film in which the entire cast was played by items of furniture.
“Well, Bond, we arrested Miss Hepplewhite at the airport last night as she was boarding a flight to Moscow. But when we searched her there was no sign of the encryption disc.”
“Did you go through her drawers yourself?” (raises eyebrow)
@46 ajay
Thanks – I forgot about Ben Kingsley’s origins. Not sure “Asian” quite covers him…not sure any classification would…but thanks for the clarification!
@48 Kingsley is Anglo-Indian. Admittedly that is a decreasing ethno-cultural demographic (Anglo-Indians face a great deal of racism from all directions, as well as erasure by people with ulterior political motives to declare them simply as mixed race -or worse, race traitors-, and various other denials of their identity), but still one that exists and probably will for a couple of generations yet. On a wider note, a lot of people of Indian Sub-continental origin do not consider themselves to be “Asian”, and some find that designation to be an insult, and think that Indian is a separate cultural and ethnic identity all of its own.
Kingsley isn’t Anglo-Indian; he wasn’t born in India. He was born in the UK.
There’s no particular reason not to reinvent James Bond as the movies have moved way beyond the books. But he has to remain British.
@50 That is one of the more contentious definitions there. I am aware of a substantial number of UK born people who claim Anglo-Indian heritage, and who say that it is inappropriate to use to term solely for people born on the Sub Continent area. I know that is a hot button issue, and it is one of the ones I referred to in passing in my original post, and I do not believe that this is the appropriate venue for this discussion.