Daniel Craig finally sees the 007 light: James Bond is a man. Changing that is an insult to women

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 22/09/2021 (1829 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

There is a strange syndrome afflicting the male actors who’ve portrayed James Bond in recent years: they keep flip-flopping on the possibility of a female 007.

Daniel Craig is the current Bond. “No Time to Die,” which arrives in theatres on Oct. 8 after changing release dates more than Alec Baldwin quits Twitter, will be Craig’s fifth and final performance as the brooding MI6 agent.

He was recently asked about the future of his character and, specifically, whether a woman or person of colour should inherit one of the most iconic roles in pop culture.

This is what he told Radio Times magazine: “The answer to that is very simple. There should simply be better parts for women and actors of colour. Why should a woman play James Bond when there should be a part just as good as James Bond, but for a woman?”

He’s right. But two years ago, while promoting “Knives Out” at the Toronto International Film Festival, Craig was asked the same question and told Variety, “Of course” there should be a female Bond. Huh? So, in 24 months, he jumped into his Aston Martin and spun into an Octopussy 180?

The previous Bond, Pierce Brosnan, experienced a similar about-face, albeit in reverse.

In 2019, Brosnan, who played the dashing spy for about a decade before Craig, told the Hollywood Reporter: “I think we’ve watched the guys do it for the last 40 years. Get out of the way, guys, and put a woman up there. I think it would be exhilarating, it would be exciting.”

I must disagree. I do not want to see a female James Bond any more than I want to watch a big screen adaptation of Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice,” in which Elizabeth Bennet is now a bloke named Edward in a string quartet, smitten by his charming manager, a Mrs. Darcy of Hertfordshire, who has acerbic views on the cello.

But if Brosnan is now enchanted by the exhilarating and exciting prospect of a Jane Bond — presumably, she drives a Tesla and takes her Aperol Spritz stirred, not shaken — why did he say this in 2015: “But a female James Bond, no, I think it has to be male. James Bond is a guy. He’s all male. His name is James, his name is James Bond.”

I’m sorry, but he was right then. And wrong four years later. That we keep having this debate — the term “female James Bond” has appeared in more than 1,300 media stories since 1982 — only proves we no longer grasp the concept of “creator intent.”

When novelist Ian Fleming created James Bond in 1953, the text, postwar context and character profile were unambiguous: James Bond is a man. James Bond is white. James Bond is a womanizing straight alpha male with a lot of baggage.

As I’ve said before, giving James Bond a sex change is not progress — it’s identity theft. Yes, by all means, create powerful female characters in the world of espionage. Yes, have them shag random beefcakes and then leave before breakfast because it’s time to fire a rocket launcher at the lair of a supervillain. Yes, imbue these female characters with the anti-heroic complexities of 007. Yes, give them modern sensibilities that dovetail with our cultural mores, if that’s the ultimate goal.

But, no, do not screw with Mr. Fleming’s creation: James Bond is a man.

This is not complicated. But the flip-flopping of the last two Bonds has made it so.

Hollywood should be a reflecting pool that mirrors society. Diversity should be cherished and promoted. But that does not mean you take a flame-thrower to existing characters to get more likes on social media. That’s not progress — it’s a patronizing affront to women and people of colour. And if this hasty impulse to gender-bend or swap race cut the other way, studios would be burned to the ground by outrage mobs.

Gal Gadot, your services are no longer required. We are rebooting this franchise as “Wonder Man.” Instead of a lasso, he has a stun gun. And I’m now trying to imagine the 30 seconds of awkward silence before security is called to the boardroom of a pitch meeting as a screenwriter shares his idea for a “White Panther,” a superhero hailing from the fabled Redneckistan who can turn beer nuts into flying boulders before climbing into his supersonic Ford F-150 to battle woke zombies.

White Panther does not wear a mask because COVID-19 is a hoax!

Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow, Carrie-Anne Moss as Trinity in “The Matrix,” Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen, Uma Thurman as Beatrix Kiddo — women have made great strides as action heroes.

But a female James Bond is a monumental step backwards.

Why? Because the lazy message is clear: “We can’t be bothered creating new characters for you chicks. So we are going to dust off this character from 70 years ago and hope audiences are more receptive than they were to, say, gender remakes of ‘Ghostbusters’ or ‘Ocean’s Eleven.’ Twitter will love this! Trust us!”

Good on Daniel Craig for pointing out James Bond is a man this month. Bad on him for suggesting otherwise two years ago. Good on Pierce Brosnan for pointing out James Bond is a man in 2015. Bad on him for suggesting otherwise four years later.

James Bond is a fictional man.

Trying to change that is an insult to women in the real world.

Vinay Menon is the Star’s pop culture columnist based in Toronto. Follow him on Twitter: @vinaymenon