Main Edition
US
FR
March 20, 2024 - 11:00am
When Daniel Craig’s final Bond film No Time To Die was released in 2021, Sir Keir Starmer was asked who his favourite iteration of 007 was. “I don’t have a favourite Bond,” said the Labour leader, “but I do think it’s time for a female Bond”. Thankfully, Barbara Broccoli and Michael G Wilson appear to be ignoring Starmer’s advice. According to reports, producers have earmarked not a woman to be the next Bond, but instead Aaron Taylor-Johnson — a 33-year-old, cisgendered, straight, white Englishman. Taylor-Johnson yesterday seemingly distanced himself from the casting, saying he had no wish to be part of the “pop culture studio machine”.
Nevertheless, the symbolism of his candidacy matters. Bond has long since become more than just a movie character. He is deeply embedded in the British psyche, as Craig’s skit with the late Queen during the opening ceremony of the London Olympics demonstrated. Yet for years now, many on the Left have viewed Bond’s unreconstructed masculinity as problematic. It doesn’t take Q Branch to work out why: as 007’s creator, Ian Fleming, once memorably said, he was designed as a hero for “warm-blood heterosexuals”.
In 2023, Fleming’s original novels were revised to remove racist and misogynistic language. Even diehard Bond fans will admit there are plenty of problematic examples. The Spy Who Loved Me contains the observation that “all women love to be semi-raped”; Fleming’s use of the N-word is liberal; and in Goldfinger, Bond “cures” Pussy Galore of her lesbianism. Understandably, such attitudes — and how to deal with them — have provided recurring headaches for the Fleming estate and EON, the producers of the film franchise.
The logical response to Orwellian calls for trigger warnings and retroactive censorship is normally to point out that the original source material is a product of its time. For example, when The Beatles sang “she was just seventeen, if you know what I mean”, the sexual morality of the Sixties was poles apart from 2024. The problem for Bond is that he is simultaneously a character of the past — “a sexist, misogynist dinosaur… a relic of the Cold War”, as Judi Dench’s M spits in Goldeneye — and also a modern-day cultural icon, and has remained so by moving with the times. He belongs both to a bygone era and today.
The producers have been tactful in the way they’ve allowed the character to evolve with the decades. Several of the Sean Connery films show Bond hitting women. By the Roger Moore era 007 had dropped the sexual violence but was still prone to casual racism, for example tipping an Indian waiter in Octopussy and telling him it should “keep you in curry for a few months”. By the time Craig made his debut in 2006’s Casino Royale, Bond was more chaste than chased — though not beyond reproach. A scene in 2012’s Skyfall where Bond creeps, uninvited, into the shower of a sex trafficking victim faced criticism for the issues it raised around consent.
Many commentators speculated that the controversial ending to No Time To Die (spoiler ahead) was a metaphor for Bond’s ability to survive in the modern world. Perhaps the producers decided that being blown up by a Royal Navy missile was a more dignified ending for Fleming’s creation than being killed off by cancel culture. Thankfully, the franchise’s imminent reboot suggests there’s life in the old dog yet. How refreshing it would be if Bond’s resurrection coincided with a more grown-up conversation around masculinity. At a time when young men need positive role models more than ever, 007 has a role to play once more. No one wants the misogynistic dinosaur described by Dench, but perhaps Fleming’s “warm-blooded” hero wasn’t such a bad template after all.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI think this is misleading. The only uses of the “N-word” in the bond novels are to describe nautical rock formations known colloquially in Jamaica as a “n******heads”. This word is used several times in a couple of novels but the “N-word” is never used to describe a person, as far as I can remember. It would be out of character for both Bond and Ian Fleming to use a derogatory words for black people.
I was doubting myself so I had a look through my collection of books and there is also a 3 uses of the word in Live and Let Die. Always in the mouths of American characters.
Stop getting Bond wrong!
At the time the books were written, the term was ubiquitous in the south and common everywhere in the USA. One can hardly fault Fleming for accurately depicting the colloquial language of the people he was writing about.
I agree. The American character who uses the term in Live and Let Die is Bond’s CIA contact, Felix Leiter who is described as Texan. As you say, this is an accurate character depiction of a Texan in the 1950s.
Its amazing how the black community have somehow made any mention of the n word a sacrilege, while habitually using it in their own songs and conversations.
If they used the same energy to run all those cities in the US where they control local government, police, education….
“Cis-gendered”. “Problematic”. I think we’ve discovered a new P*ssy Galore.
I must be dreaming.
I still enjoy the 007 classics from time to time and will never apologize for it!
It was the right time to wrap up the big-screen adventure before it became even more wokified – just look at what’s happened to F Herbert’s Dune, become a parable of feminist Palestinian resistance.
However, I would like to see the 007 adventures continue on one of the more conservative streaming platforms, returning his persona to the ironically sexist and imperialist 1950s. There, I can only think of Amazon which did an OK job with Reacher.
‘Yet for years now, many on the Left have viewed Bond’s unreconstructed masculinity as problematic.’
The Left is not the target market for a Bond film, so to change him to suit that audience would simply meaning losing the one they got without gaining a replacement. I expect the reason Starmer doesn’t have a favourite Bond is because he’s never seen any of the films; he’s just the not type who would enjoy them. Choosing a straight white Englishman in defiance of all the tedious modern shibboleths shows that the film makers know their audience.
It also shows how wokeism will be defeated. Once it starts costing them money, some of the greedier corporate powers that be will simply quietly drop it. Then the holdouts will see their audience demographics narrow and their profits fall relative to the competition and the boards of those companies will replace their woke CEOs. Profit will still trump politics in business world. It’s already happening with DEI. There was another article a few days back about how organizations using DEI as an investment criterion are consistently underperforming when compared to the market as a whole and the people interested in profits are dropping it like a hot potato.
“The logical response”… how quaint. Isn’t that considered problematic, racist, sexist, transphobic, Islamaphobic, climate denying, blah, blah, blah
Demanding a “female Bond” is pathetic virtue signalling for Guardian chin-strokers, who were obviously Starmer’s target audience for his comments.
Demand more films in which women are the action hero, by all means. But in the words of Barbara Broccoli, “Bond comes from a male place”. His motivations, virtues, flaws etc are very male. You can’t make Bond female without erasing what makes him Bond.
What progressives really hate is that the producers and actors have always been very nimble in reinventing Bond enough for each generation and audiences recognise that. The incredible long-term success of the franchise is testament to a character who stays relevant, not one who is stuck in the past. Demands that Bond must be a woman are simply progressives’ way of trying to force obsolescence onto a character in direct opposition to the wishes of the audience. But then they always think they know best, don’t they.
There may well come a time when Bond is done, but personally I hope he carries on “keeping the British end up” for many years and films more.
Films which showcase female action heroes almost invariably flop, unless the character is designed to appeal to a male audience (ie, is sexy). Women do not watch action films as has been proved multiple times over by the recent Marvel box-office disasters featuring unattractive, “strong wahmen” leads.
Amazing how long it has taken the industry to admit this simple truth: boys like adventures: girls like romances.
Amazing how Hollywood has managed to struggle along these last 100 years while labouring under this terrible misunderstanding!
I once saw the film “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” with my then wife. She asked me whether I liked it. I said “It was great. I love Kung Fu movies”. She then said “What do you mean, ‘Kung Fu movie’? It was a love story”!
There are enough exceptions of hit female led films/franchises in action-heavy genres to show that “invariably” is putting it too strongly.
The Hunger Games films were a big hit. Individual MCU/DCXU/Star Wars films like Captain Marvel, Wonder Woman and Rogue One were big hits, though in the case of the first two their sequels were disappointing. Underworld, Resident Evil, Alien, and A Quiet Place are all multi-film female-led franchises. The two Kill Bill films are among Tarentino’s highest grossing. Everything, Everywhere, All At Once is another example.
Not to mention that on TV there have been hit series like Buffy and Killing Eve.
I think it’s probably true that female-led action films are still higher risk for investors, but the record shows that done well they can succeed.
Odette, Carve Her Name with Pride and Wish Me Luck support your case.
“Demand more films in which women are the action hero, by all means. ”
Let’s first demand more women in dangerous jobs, fire brigades, military conscription…
Why should we “demand” films with female action heroes when they don’t even turn up for ordinary supermarket logistics, bin cleaning or warehouse jobs that involve lifting something heavy or working outside 9-5?
These are the ramblings of a madman…
When working in international engineering one can often be sent overseas at short notice to deal with a disaster or replace someone injured or killed. When repairing damaged utilities, say powerlines, one can work at night, during the weekend and even over Christmas or Easter.
Major infrastructure operations are often undertaken over Bank Holidays when three days are needed.
I don’t see what the number of female firefighters IRL has to do with anything.
There are no real male Jedi Knights or billionaires who fight crime dressed as bats either. But nobody seems to have an issue suspending disbelief sufficiently to accept Luke Skywalker and Bruce Wayne being portrayed as men.
These films are fiction not documentaries.
In 2023, Fleming’s original novels were revised to remove racist and misogynistic language.
.
Who are we fighting with today, Eurasia or Eastasia?
.
I will always remember the day when Khrushchev was removed. The teacher came to our class, asked to open the history textbook on such and such a page and carefully cover up by pencil Khrushchev, who was standing next to Gagarin in the photograph.
I was a 12-year-old boy with a Soviet upbringing, but I still remember the nauseating feeling that I experienced. I thought then, Khrushchev was and you can’t cover him with a pencil.
Now I’m 70 and I see how we return to that crap life today
Great comment. I cant imagine why anyone would downvote it.
Jeff, this is not even a comment, this is just one of the memorable episodes of my growing up. It’s sad that it came to mind now
.
PS. My memory is generally a strange thing, there are many moments in it, the influence of which on my views and on my life I understand only now
Maybe they should introduce a protocol that you can’t downvote a post unless you leave a reply to explain your argument.
I’m inclined to agree with this. It’s just too easy to downvote. The counterargument that an upvote would need the same justification is not strong – the reason being that the upvoter agrees with the comment.
Khrushchev’s retirement was actually a sign of progress in Russia. All previous rulers going back centuries had either died in office or been assasinated.
My favourite story involving Khrushchev flowed from Gorbachev being asked in an interview how the world would have been different if it had been Khrushchev who was assassinated in ’63, with Kennedy living on. His reply was that he doubted that Mr Onassis would have married Mrs Khrushchev.
Another ludicrous story! You really are full of them (it)!
Dude, calm down. You’re gonna burst a blood vessel or something.
Still, Orwell would have had Winston Smith come round, cut the picture of Khrushchev out of your book, and paste a picture of Brezhnev in its place.
Picture of Brezhnev next day after Khrushchev was removed?
The Man with the Golden Gun, a personal favorite.
James Bond is an amoral government assassin, shedding rivers of blood in the pursuit of improbable conspiracies. What’s to condemn? He fits the zeitgeist perfectly.
Plus, despite him being a “secret agent”, he can walk into any bar in the world, and the barman knows him, and what his preferred drink is.
“Several of the Sean Connery films show Bond hitting women. By the Roger Moore era 007 had dropped the sexual violence.”
I am anti-woke but this is incorrect. In The Man With The Golden Gun, Moore-Bond slaps Andrea Anders (Maud Adams) around quite a bit. More, in fact, than the story would require. Roger Moore looks distinctly uncomfortable in these scenes.
I am surprised telling an Indian Waiter that a tip should ‘keep you in curry for a few months’ is casual rascism or at any rate the best (worst) example of casual rascism within Ian Fleming’s works. If a French man tipped me and said that should “keep me in roast potatoes for a few months”, I think I’d laugh. Is tipping a kid and saying “that should keep you in sweets for a few months” ageist?
Agree. That’s one of many comments in this article which show that the author is on the wrong side of this debate. The correct response to ‘racism’ in the cultural detritus of our society (i.e., historically accurate characters, attitudes, terminology in books and movies and such)… is a big fat ‘So what?’ The only way to move forward is to tell the people who insist on these Stalinist rewrites of history that they are wrong and to ignore their calls. That does mean you have to get used to wrongly being accused of ‘racism’ and being wise enough to realize that criticisms only sting if you respect the critic. The rest of those idiots can go pound sand.
I grew up in a movie theatre in the 70’s ( Dad worked there) and saw a few Bond films before the age of 10. Somehow I was neither traumatized nor inclined to use the language upsetting folks now.
Although you do travel everywhere by gyrocopter.
Some very predictable Patridge-esque responses to this! You guys never let me down!
The Bond character has been quietly updated over the years as one would expect with a long running franchise. The old movies are of little interest to younger generations – its not just the outdated attitudes but the old school special effects and the silly stories – there’s a good reason why people loved the Austin Powers movies.
Daniel Craig has delivered two of the very best Bond movies and three that are pretty meh. The box office success of his iteration shows that there is a future for Bond and that the dinosaurs who think he has become too woke can be safely ignored.
Any attempt to reboot Bond back to the 50s/60s is fraught with danger. The line between timeless cool and ludicrous parody is a fine one and the aforementioned Austin Powers has already made a mockery of many of the Bond tropes. On the other end of the scale, the Bourne and Mission Impossible movies have upped the standard for action and stunts in the last 25 years.
I don’t think its time for Bond to hang up his dinner jacket just yet but they need to make a good choice for the new actor and come up with something clever for the story but they have done a pretty good job over the years with the updates and no reason to think they can’t do it again.
I don’t necessarily disagree but the issue I would suggest is that today it is more difficult to come up with a suitable story line. Can you imagine anyone in MI5 or MI6 today being lauded as a near iconic super hero who routinely saves the world? Me neither. Setting such a ‘spy’ story in the 1950s or 1960s makes it much simpler to write a believable story line. The last Bond movie was awful. Story rubbish. Even throwing gads of money at it, still couldn’t make it work. I just hope the producers pay more attention to the story. And I still love the old Bond movies. OHMSS is my personal favourite.
There was a Russian super spy who went on to big things – Vladimir Putin.
It really is way past time for Bond to hang up his dinner jacket. The original Fleming books were written when Britain’s leaders still harboured delusions of maintaining an empire, or some of it, although I doubt the British people cared, if they ever did…again doubtful.
The books are historical novels, as Anthony Burgess pointed out in a foreword to some later paperback editions. They are interesting for the social commentary and attitudes they reveal as well as being well written. Fleming could probably have been a good writer of the Somerset Maugham type.
The early films are also interesting for the same reasons. After that they are total rubbish. Possibly a re-boot back to the 50s would work, but really why bother…except for the money, of course.
“although I doubt the British people cared, if they ever did…again doubtful”
Huh? Respectfully suggest you do some basic historical research. Once upon the time the Empire was a source of great pride to wide swathes of British society, absolutely including the poor and working classes. There’s lots and lots of evidence of this in popular entertainment, popular song, advertising language, etc – not to mention, of course, letters and diaries and such.
Respectfully suggest you widen your research…Porter would be a good place to start…
You too! MacKenzie has long since responded to Porter’s selective reading of the evidence…
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/249036162_‘Comfort’_and_Conviction_A_Response_to_Bernard_Porter
Fully aware of the dispute…the point being that your assertion is disputed…but good to see you’ve done the research…
Yeah, whether biological sex is real is disputed these days. But even though people dispute things… sometimes they’re still wrong.
Where physical violence and protection are required, I expect Britain uses Special Forces.
Britt Ecklands Bond Girl name ‘Plenty O’Toole’ will never not be funny.
The people who complain about these things are engaging in performative worthy-ness and are usually excruciatingly boring.
At least try to get your facts right….
Ok, Lana Wood, it’s been a while.
That’s first one of your posts I’ve read in a long time. I usually skip over whatever drivel it is you’ve vomited out. You’re a sort of tiresome teenage troll with nothing useful to say and always saying it too often. You’d fit in better on Reddit.
Don’t blame me because you can’t get your facts straight, pops!
He’s telling the truth. You are excruciatingly boring.
Yet here you are, replying to every single comment I make!
Bond Girl names were brilliantly parodied in Austin Powers (eg. Alotta Fagina).
In the books , the women are tougher than in the films. The pioneering women of empire , for example Ursula Graham Bower and those who served in the SOE, nursing and various intelligence organisations married men with similar experince and character, kept quiet about their roles and/or moved overseas. Post WW2 , those who dominated The Arts, Entertainment, Intellectuals had little or no combat experince. Very few if any American women had the same experience of combat as British women and the USA was massive market. By the 1960s the vast majority of women and men had no knowledge of what had been achieved on the frontiers of Empire and in war and did not want to know because it made them feel inferior. In the 1950s women in Africa had to be able to shoot wild animals for protection. A friends aunt had to shoot a water buffalo at 100yds with a rifle and a cobra at 10 yds with a side arm.
Consequently, the women in the films are are portrayed as less independent and tough than in the books in order to not make audiences feel inadequate. One of the problems of women in the SOE and nurses who had been in combat was that many of the men they would have married were killed and those who were left did not measure up; for example Nancy Wake AC, GM and Krystyna Skarbek GM, OBE . When the captain on aship ordered all crew to wear medals, when Skarbek wore hers, they felt inferior.
Krystyna Skarbek – Wikipedia
Honour Blackman was a dispatch rider in WW2 and was happy to play p***y Galore. Honour Blackman brought a film showing self defence moves to ward off unwanted advances from men. All the women in the James Bond novels are athletic independent tough women with minds of their own. PG is successful criminal, Honeychile Ryder a women who sails the open seas and undertakes deep diving without oxygen to collect shells to sell to support herself, Mary Anne Russell is a SIS Officer who is a crack shot and saves Bond’s life due to her markmanship, in Goldfinger and For Your Eyes Only, women attempt to kill men who have killed their loved ones.
The women who were tough and trained in WW2 tended to marry similar men, many who worked overseas post WW2. Many woman had short term sexual relations in WW2 because they did not know whether the man would be alive in a few hours and they were hardly going to mention these affairs to future husbands. RAF pilots ( especially fighter pilots ), were like rock stars and footballers in WW2 and were chased by women. There was also a tradition of not shooting a line so people with experience only used talk about it to people with similar experiences. Also people wanted to put their war experiences behind them and build a better future. As Orwell pointed out few middle class left wing intellectuals volunteered for combat.
I doubt there was any other nation in WW2 who produced a woman like Graham Bower ?
Ursula Graham Bower – Wikipedia
General slim recognised the work she was doing and supported her with arms and reinforcements, giving her her own unit within V Force, nicknamed “Bower Force”. Bower’s force of Nagas became so effective that the Japanese put a price on her head. She was the subject of an American comic book entitled Jungle Queen.[2][6] Her personal weapon of choice was the Sten gun, two of which she wore out in action. Trained as a child by her father to shoot, she had no qualms about handling firearms and training her Naga scouts in their use.
It was people who had no experience of combat in WW2 and the responsibility, toughness and resourcefulness women who were shocked by the female characters in Janes Bond. How many feminists have emulated Ursula Graham Bower ?
Great comment and links thanks. The right-wing “women love romances, wealthy men and staying at home in the Cotswolds” stereotype is virtually identical to the left-wing “women are left-brained empaths who need to walk on the opposite side of the street from men in London while being terrified of chaps jumping out from behind parked cars” trope.
Our grandmothers who served in WW2 (and the millenia of working women before) would have been aghast.
In the 1980s there was an article in the Daily Mail. A recently retired lecturer, in her sixties from Bristol University was attacked by three men. One has dispatched with a knife hand to the throat, another a kick to the balls and the third thrown down some steps. She was an ex SOE agent who was trained by W E Fairbarn and never had another lesson in close quarter combat.
I think there were many brave women in WW 2. It didn’t stick to national boundaries. I can think of many in India who were similar even if they fought for different causes.
True, Noor Inayat Khan GC. No other nation created the SOE and trained women in sabotage and had women nursing at the front line Queen’s Alexandra Army Royal Nursing Corp.
Noor Inayat Khan – Wikipedia
Sisters In Arms: British Army Nurses Tell Their Story: Amazon.co.uk: Tyrer, Nicola: 9780753825679: Books
Local Nurse had North Africa Star from serving at El Alamein, Tobruk and Beghazi. She said she had to throw herself over the patients as shells landed around her as the surgeon was operating.
Nancy Wake GM when asked if she had any regrets , she answered ” Yes, I did not kill enough Nazis “.
Nancy Wake – Wikipedia
There were many brave ladies during World WarTwo and just after. My own relatives who fled Burma in 1942 with very little assistance from a crumbling administration when the Japanese attacked and took over Rangoon.
They marched through jungles infested with snakes, tigers etc after leading lives of affluence and comfort, with little food or even water, often with small children.
I don’t think it’s confined to nations- think of those oppressed in Europe or the rest of Asia.
It’s not for nothing it’s called the ” greatest generation”.
Do not disagree. What I said no other nation put so many women into combat situations as matter of policy such as manning airfields during attack, radar stations, anti aircraft guns,
Daphne Pearson the first woman recipient of the GC – Alan Malcher
Corporal J M Robins, MM, WAAF | Imperial War Museums (iwm.org.uk)
Perhaps you’re being as over-intelligent as Bond is supposedly over-masculine. The only thing I find passe and objectionable is the obligatory gratuitous sex, as though every man is expected to be an on-tap hyper-w***e.