Rush Limbaugh: James Bond can't be black like Idris Elba!

[Jiggyfly]

No. I thought it was a Rush Limbugh thing because he is a controversial figure that provokes people's opinions.

OK my bad.

 

[L.T. Fan]

OK my bad.

No problem.

 

[Deuce]

None of this really matters anyhow. Eon Productions owns Bond, not Sony. They will continue to make the decisions on casting.

 

[townsend]

While we're at it, why not have Superman be fat? Fat people are far less included in superhero movies than black people.

Chris Pratt was fat. I don't know if there are diet plans for blackness.

 

[townsend]

What movie is this, I have to see it.

I believe it's called The Conquerer.

 

[townsend]

So the rock just played Hercules. I don't know exactly what race a Greek God is but I bet it's not half black half Samoan.

 

[fortsbest]

Other than the changing of an iconic characters race or sex for inclusiveness I think we are on similar pages. Writers or whatever need to come up with good characters for talented actors of any race to portray or in the case of comics, if you think s character will be viable no matter the race. Hell, Spawn was black, is burnt and is amazing; so it isn't like it can't be done. Portier, Denzel, Johnson and others all made or make entertaining movies that made money. I love female comic book characters because they draw them hot looking. In any entertainment medium you can succeed regardless your race or sex but Jeebs said what I meant just fine.

 

[Jiggyfly]

Other than the changing of an iconic characters race or sex for inclusiveness I think we are on similar pages. Writers or whatever need to come up with good characters for talented actors of any race to portray or in the case of comics, if you think s character will be viable no matter the race. Hell, Spawn was black, is burnt and is amazing; so it isn't like it can't be done. Portier, Denzel, Johnson and others all made or make entertaining movies that made money. I love female comic book characters because they draw them hot looking. In any entertainment medium you can succeed regardless your race or sex but Jeebs said what I meant just fine.

I don't know why anyone would ever think this was about inclusiveness, that's a very narrow view to take.

 

[townsend]

I don't know why anyone would ever think this was about inclusiveness, that's a very narrow view to take.

I would say that's my view in the broad strokes. In that some of the best actors don't get lead roles on account of their race.

Personally I've always assumed any race can play Macbeth and for that same reason any race should be able to play Peter Parker.

 

[jeebs]

The conversation has shown me a contradiction in my own feelings. I have no problem with an actor of any race playing a character, but I do have a problem with changing the race of a character; so what is the difference?

White people can play samurai but that doesn't make their character white. Does the same hold true for a black Peter Parker? In contrast, I would assume a black Macbeth was scottish.

 

[townsend]

The conversation has shown me a contradiction in my own feelings. I have no problem with an actor of any race playing a character, but I do have a problem with changing the race of a character; so what is the difference?

White people can play samurai but that doesn't make their character white. Does the same hold true for a black Peter Parker? In contrast, I would assume a black Macbeth was scottish.

I would say black Peter Parker would be black. But he'd still be a bullied kid from New York. It's pretty common for a character to be reinvented or reimagined through the lenses of a new writer. Adam West's Batman isn't Michael Keaton's Batman, who isn't Christian Bale's Batman. Yet no one was upset by a gritty vigilante who didn't get tied up or dance the batoosi.

Hell, Catwoman changed races in the batman show and no one was upset.

 

[fortsbest]

I don't know why anyone would ever think this was about inclusiveness, that's a very narrow view to take.

So that's the only thing you care to comment on in my post? None of the other stuff even registered? That being the case, if it isn't about inclusiveness or taking an iconic role and giving it over to a black actor just because, then what would you call it. If that isn't the reason, then why even risk doing it? I scan through the Yahoo home page news stuff just for grins every so often and even there, any talk about movie or comic articles has recently been about the lack of prominent minority or female characters in comics or movies. They coo over the fact Marvel is going to do a Ms. Marvel movie in what 2018 and that a Black Panther movie is also going to be made ( a favorite character of mine BTW along with Luke Cage), so you can't for one second tell me that isn't what this is about.

 

[Smitty]

It actually makes perfect sense that Bond is a code name more than a specific person and I would love the idea you have here.

Not sure I agree. 007 is the code, Bond is the name. Right?

 

[jeebs]

Not sure I agree. 007 is the code, Bond is the name. Right?

The theory is the that 007 and James Bond are code names, and every different actor was just the newest one to rise to the position of James Bond. I like the theory better than the movie, especially as it explains the different actors personalities and the occasional married bond.

But it isn't perfect, I mean Daniel Craig was James and we watched him earn the job.

 

[Deuce]

But it isn't perfect, I mean Daniel Craig was James and we watched him earn the job.

Doesn't mean it doesn't fit the theory. Judy Densch was M and when she died, she passes the "M" title to Feinnes. The Bond name could be just like that.

 

[Kbrown]

I always saw Bond as working the same way as comic book superheroes. He's always roughly the same age (with some leeway) despite dealing with whatever world threat is contemporary to him, his personality changes depending on the writer, and sometimes an origin story will pop up that puts a different spin on his story.

Establishing continuity amongst all of the movies isn't a terrible idea. I just don't know that it's necessary.

 

[Jiggyfly]

So that's the only thing you care to comment on in my post? None of the other stuff even registered? That being the case, if it isn't about inclusiveness or taking an iconic role and giving it over to a black actor just because, then what would you call it. If that isn't the reason, then why even risk doing it? I scan through the Yahoo home page news stuff just for grins every so often and even there, any talk about movie or comic articles has recently been about the lack of prominent minority or female characters in comics or movies. They coo over the fact Marvel is going to do a Ms. Marvel movie in what 2018 and that a Black Panther movie is also going to be made ( a favorite character of mine BTW along with Luke Cage), so you can't for one second tell me that isn't what this is about.

That was not directed at anybody in particular, just some posters seemed to be going in that direction.

So in your mind it cannot be about using a hot actor that has a big following?

But if you believe Sony is going out on a limb with their billion dollar franchise to promote inclusivity more power to you.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I have no problem with creative casting with fictional works but I am more of a purist when it comes to biographical works. While I realize that some actors have portrayed real people and aren't the exact racial background, I still like for the makeup to try to emulate the real thing. The closer they can look like the actual person the better it is for me.

 

[jeebs]

Doesn't mean it doesn't fit the theory. Judy Densch was M and when she died, she passes the "M" title to Feinnes. The Bond name could be just like that.

Yes but at the start of the first Daniel Craig movie he has not earned the rank 007 but he is still called James Bond, showing that the name and the title are not linked.

 

[jeebs]

I always saw Bond as working the same way as comic book superheroes. He's always roughly the same age (with some leeway) despite dealing with whatever world threat is contemporary to him, his personality changes depending on the writer, and sometimes an origin story will pop up that puts a different spin on his story.

Establishing continuity amongst all of the movies isn't a terrible idea. I just don't know that it's necessary.

It is not neccessary, but I have seen some write ups that break down the different bond personalities and I do think it adds to an already great existing mythos