By: Billy

Billy — Tue, 13 Feb 2018 16:28:00 +0000

Weisz is right. This is ridiculous. Fleming wrote the character a certain way, from a male, 50’s dominated point of view. The idea of changing it to a woman is frankly absurd and would change the whole nature of the Bond universe – never gonna happen. I’m all for new spy films with female protagonists (keeping an eye on ‘Red Sparrow’) but Atomic Blonde was horrendous, with none of the dark romanticism that Bond possesses.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Tue, 13 Feb 2018 15:14:00 +0000

Of course a male actor of color could play the role. That shouldn’t even be an argument. There are only three requirements for the character and they have nothing to do with race: he’s British, he can embody a “power fantasy” for men around the world and be a sex symbol for women or men. That’s it. You just need to embody those qualities because that’s the appeal of the character. You don’t even need to know how to act, as George’s performance in the role proves.

It’s also totally different to the Doctor Who casting. The British performer playing Doctor isn’t a sex symbol: he or she needs to embody courage, curiosity and kindness. The appeal of the character is that – despite the challenges, difficulties and setbacks that he or she may face – The Doctor never loses his or her kindness or curiosity (which is more courageous than anything else), qualities that are not intrinsically masculine or feminine or white or blue or whatever.

Anyone that says The Doctor needs to be a man or that James Bond needs to be white is a moron. Equally, anyone that suggests that James Bond could be a woman just doesn’t understand the appeal of the character.

Comments on: Rachel Weisz Says There Shouldn’t Be A Female James Bond

By: Billy

By: Andrew