James Bond Racist
Discussion
jonby said:
brilliant stuff.
Very astute post, nail on the head.Idris would renew my interest in the flagging franchise. I see him in the Tim Dalton mould, he is more appropriate for me that Tom Hilldston. Tom is more in the Moore mould, and doesn't really fit today, unless one was going for retro and made a BOnd film back in the 50's/60's.
Personally I want Bond ore like Craig hinted at in Casino Royale, before it all went into bizarro 70's land with his later efforts. Being neither one thing, not t'other.
Mr Whippy said:
NinjaPower said:
KAgantua said:
I reckon they should remake 'Live Or Let Die' but with a black bond and white protagonists.
Live and Let Die is terrifically racist all the way through. It would be a great shame to ruin it.Mr Whippy said:
NinjaPower said:
KAgantua said:
I reckon they should remake 'Live Or Let Die' but with a black bond and white protagonists.
Live and Let Die is terrifically racist all the way through. It would be a great shame to ruin it.Oh, and if you read the original book of Live and Let Die, one of the chapters is called N***er Heaven.
Don't misunderstand me, I never said there was anything wrong with the film, it's perfectly enjoyable. Certainly a period correct film!
jonby said:
You state Fleming's book is the scene setter, that Fleming states he is white and that's why it's important. You state that to ignore a trait of Bond in Fleming's book is to trample over & ignore history. You make no mention to the films - you are clear and unambiguous - Fleming wrote the book, Fleming described Bond as white, so Bond is white
In the very same book, in the very first chapter, Bond is a chain smoker. In most subsequent books, he is a chain smoker. It was you, not me, who stated Fleming defined the character. Suddenly you have changed - it's the film makers who have decided which bits in the book are important and which are not, rather than the author
Incidentally Connery's Bond did smoke. So have most other Bonds. But not DC
Fundamentally, I'm trying to illustrate that bond is white, not black. Or gay, lesbian, or the other traits you considered to be acceptable modernisations of the character. Do you understand what is meant by continuity ?In the very same book, in the very first chapter, Bond is a chain smoker. In most subsequent books, he is a chain smoker. It was you, not me, who stated Fleming defined the character. Suddenly you have changed - it's the film makers who have decided which bits in the book are important and which are not, rather than the author
Incidentally Connery's Bond did smoke. So have most other Bonds. But not DC
Just like Poirot is Belgian, and Sherlock Holmes is British.
Edited by gavsdavs on Friday 1st April 15:09
NinjaPower said:
Mr Whippy said:
NinjaPower said:
KAgantua said:
I reckon they should remake 'Live Or Let Die' but with a black bond and white protagonists.
Live and Let Die is terrifically racist all the way through. It would be a great shame to ruin it.Oh, and if you read the original book of Live and Let Die, one of the chapters is called N***er Heaven.
Don't misunderstand me, I never said there was anything wrong with the film, it's perfectly enjoyable. Certainly a period correct film!
Well if he stood out as a white man in among many black people then that is a fair observation no? It's a nice way to say it and he didn't seem upset.
Black people being called Boy, boy is a word used by many people to describe other men in a condescending manner. That sheriff chap in Bond uses the word Boy to describe James too. Not sure on that one.
I've not read the book, but without context that chapter title could mean anything.
Not to say you're wrong, but racism surely has to be vindictive too? I didn't see any vindictive attitudes to black people in that Bond film. They were just black baddies. But if they're not black then they're white, or whatever other colour you fancy.
Infact, we're talking about having a black Bond now just so they've had one. If anything that strikes me as more racist in todays social climate. Be chosen on merit, not because of your skin colour!
It's going to be Olivia Coleman according to the DM, not that it's 1st April or anything.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3518227/No...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3518227/No...
Mr Whippy said:
Infact, we're talking about having a black Bond now just so they've had one. If anything that strikes me as more racist in todays social climate. Be chosen on merit, not because of your skin colour!
Now that I agree with fully. There is a difference between saying the next bond could be black and the next bond should be black. The point is that I don't care what colour the next bond is. To me, it simply doesn't matter. Those who actively want the next Bond to be black are in some respects similar to those who actively don't want the next bond to be black - they are both 'seeing' colour in an area where it shouldn't be relevant to even think about colourMr Whippy said:
Not to say you're wrong, but racism surely has to be vindictive too? I didn't see any vindictive attitudes to black people in that Bond film. They were just black baddies. But if they're not black then they're white, or whatever other colour you fancy.
Again, agree fully. Racism is all about context but many seem to have lost sight of that and use vocabulary as the determinant - it's possible to be racist without using stereotypically racist terminology and it's possible to use the terminology without being racist. If every Bond film portrayed black people as the baddies, that would arguably, perhaps, be racist. But as it's the only bond film I recall with a black baddie or even a black henchman, you could use it as an argument as to why bond is not racist. Indeed, it certainly doesn't seem to have bothered bond when it comes to women - he's slept with women of just about every possible nationality, race & colour.
Edited by jonby on Friday 1st April 16:24
jonby said:
he's slept with women of just about every possible nationality, race & colour.
Bond: Why do Chinese girls taste different from all other girls?Ling: You think we better, huh?
Bond: No, just different. Like Peking duck is different from Russian caviar. But I love them both.
Classic Bond.
Honestly, whilst i will always think of Bond as a white male, i would not be too bothered if they chose to cast a man of colour in his role.
For me (someone who loved Moore when young but dislikes those films now) the most important thing about Bond is that they must be an utterly ruthless, calculating and emotionally retarded b
d. But above all OUR emotionally retarded, calculating and utterly ruthless bd.
For me (someone who loved Moore when young but dislikes those films now) the most important thing about Bond is that they must be an utterly ruthless, calculating and emotionally retarded b
d. But above all OUR emotionally retarded, calculating and utterly ruthless bd.
Don't.
These days it's so bloody hard as a white boy to know what to say (actually I'm sort of pinkish but will turn darker than many with added melanin once exposed to the sun for a bit and can get an almost blue tone to my skin when very cold, except when it is very, very cold and i turn white...)
Today I'm going with man/woman/people of colour because I feel like it.
Tomorrow I may go with 'non Caucasian'
Next week possibly Black/Asian/Oriental/etc. I'll see where the mood takes me knowing that whatever I say someone would prefer a different term so perhaps if I vary the terms I can so that I am fully inclusive with the offence I cause.
These days it's so bloody hard as a white boy to know what to say (actually I'm sort of pinkish but will turn darker than many with added melanin once exposed to the sun for a bit and can get an almost blue tone to my skin when very cold, except when it is very, very cold and i turn white...)
Today I'm going with man/woman/people of colour because I feel like it.
Tomorrow I may go with 'non Caucasian'
Next week possibly Black/Asian/Oriental/etc. I'll see where the mood takes me knowing that whatever I say someone would prefer a different term so perhaps if I vary the terms I can so that I am fully inclusive with the offence I cause.
Rude-boy said:
or me (someone who loved Moore when young but dislikes those films now) the most important thing about Bond is that they must be an utterly ruthless, calculating and emotionally retarded bd. But above all OUR emotionally retarded, calculating and utterly ruthless bd.
Moore was my Bond growing up as well. Loved them at the time...don't hate them now, I always find something to appreciate in all Bond films...I can watch them with a lot of provisos, they're basically travelogues for the world...and stuntmen. d. But above all OUR emotionally retarded, calculating and utterly ruthless bd.
A bit like Carry On...I can ignore the Taran call and the 'sit!' stuff.jonby said:
If every Bond film portrayed black people as the baddies, that would arguably, perhaps, be racist. But as it's the only bond film I recall with a black baddie or even a black henchman, you could use it as an argument as to why bond is not racist. Indeed, it certainly doesn't seem to have bothered bond when it comes to women - he's slept with women of just about every possible nationality, race & colour.
More of a misogynist than a racist then. Bond has been quite egalitarian in baddies and goodies I think.Isn't James Bond a codename? For me his race has never been a part of his character so wouldn't bother me who played him. You couldn't have a gay Bond because that's against one of the core tenants of his character, but you could have had a black actor in any previous films and it would have made little difference.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff