Imagine being married to the actor who is currently playing James Bond. Imagine coming home to that every day! It’s probably not as fun as I’m imagining, because Daniel Craig is a grump and he’s probably in a bad mood constantly about keeping his body ripped for the James Bond role. Still, I love Rachel Weisz and Daniel Craig together, and I like the way they support each other. Rachel has seen the process of making these Bond films and she’s figured out that the whole thing really isn’t that great. In a new interview, Rachel basically tells women that they shouldn’t be trying to be a female James Bond.
Rachel Weisz doesn’t want to see a female James Bond movie, saying she believes women “should get their own stories.”
“[Fleming] devoted an awful lot of time to writing this particular character, who is particularly male and relates in a particular way to women,” Weisz told The Telegraph. “Why not create your own story rather than jumping on to the shoulders and being compared to all those other male predecessors? Women are really fascinating and interesting and should get their own stories.”
Of course, Weisz is married to our current James Bond (Daniel Craig), who is set to reprise his role of 007 in “Bond 25,” set for release November 2019. No director has become attached yet.
I’ve never really thought that the “we should have a JANE Bond” thing was an actual demand to recast the role as female, it always felt more like a larger argument about female-led action films or just female-led films in general. The point was and is to challenge the status quo and make people really think, “Wait, why couldn’t James Bond be played by a woman?” Or: “Why don’t women have an iconic action heroine?” That being said, I disagree with Rachel about this – Fleming had strong feelings about a lot of things but as the character has been modernized over time, why NOT recast the role with someone other than a white dude? What’s the BFD?
Photos courtesy of WENN.
I agree. Just like Nancy Drew shouldn’t be rewritten as a man. Some roles are fine w being men or woman, they don’t need to be turned to be both. Regardless of a movement, some characters should still remain what and who they were as that is part of its legacy and there’s nothing wrong with keeping it that way..changing the color of these iconic roles skin, that’s no big deal though and should be considered…
The figure of James Bond is originally ethinically white British. Why should it be recast with a POC actor? Is being white British that bad?
Because it’s a fictional character and cam also be played by a PoC. There are Black British actors you know.
But I agree no need for James Bond to become Jane Bond.
On the Annilation thread and pretty much any book-to-film thread, everyone was fighting for the film makers to respect author’s vision as written in the books, yet when it comes to respecting Ian Fleming’s vision of Bond AS WRITTEN IN NUMEROUS BOOKS, everyone is Insistent that it has to be changed. Go figure.
And that’s before one gets into conversations about diversity etc.
I agree. We can have more than one spy. Why not make one black or from Japan? Bond is Connery and Moore. White, handsome and very British. But we also need other action heroes.
I think she’s right too. There are infinite possibilities for writing new stories for new characters, spies included, so why alter an established character in such a fundamental way? Don’t get the point.
“…why NOT recast the role with someone other than a white dude? What’s the BFD?”
Weren’t the last two Bonds the highest-grossing in the entire series? Why would they mess with what’s working just fine? For social justice-y reasons? Sorry, but that’s just plain dumb.
If you want an action heroine movie, just watch Atomic Blonde. That’s what it’s there for.
Atomic Blonde was not good.
@V4REAL I disagree 😁
I honestly don’t care how they achieve it, cast a woman in a well-known male role or create more new female action heros, bottom line is that there need to be more movies with women kicking a**. Which, thinking on it, probably means both. Why don’t do both things? A female bond and original characters?
But either are the Bond films. There’s room for a female driven, bloated, badly written action film, why not ATOMIC BLONDE?
James Bond has a certain toxic masculinity and in all Bond movies there is a whiff of colonial or imperialist subtext which panders to what some people believe to be the “great british empire”: telling other folks how to live or deciding who should die and who should live and defending the Queen and britain’s interests etc. Only the latest Bond movies feature distinctive terrorist antagonists who are usually a threat to the whole world.
Why a woman should take over such parts is something I don’t understand. Is that really progress?
And there are several female James Bonds’ already: Proud Mary, Atomic Blonde …
I’m here for an Atomic Blonde franchise. Or SALT. Hell, it’s 2018, can we have both?
I absolutely agree with Rachel on this and this the reason why I am so annoyed with the current trend of reconceiving everything as “female x”.
There are properties where it works but in general I find this approach incredibly lazy and actually insulting. I am not satisfied with an existing property just switching gender and calling it a day. I think women deserve characters that are developed with care and consideration.
Well said!
Atomic Blonde!
She’s telling us that JB is in fact a terrible character, as in he’s a terrible person. Women shouldn’t aspire to be the female version of a terrible person. I agree. Bond is a horrible man, let’s not remake him as a terrible woman. Find something new and fresh we can relate to. I actually hate Bond.
I disagree with this. I think women are still expected to be flawless in media, or have flaws that are endearing or not severe. I cannot relate to that expectation. A character like JB is tailored for a dark, self-indulgent and unsavoury fantasy, and I would like women characters awarded the same thing – to be dark like that. To be promiscuous, callous, amoral, and kick names and take ass. It’s not about ‘aspiring to be that person’, it’s about being able to give into a temptation to be awful and not care, through fiction.
I like reading dark things about dark people, and then to return to my daily life and be the best and kindest person I can be.
Still, I don’t want a gender bent JB though, mostly because, like I said below in another comment, I don’t want men’s hand-me-downs.
I agree with this to a certain extent but come on, Bond is just an ass. He’s the worst example of toxic masculinity. And when people were recently discussing the SJP/Kim Cattrall hoopla, almost everyone agreed that they hated the Carrie character on SATC because she WAS exactly what you described women should sometimes be portrayed as. I liked the show specifically because she was NOT always nice and likeable. None of them were, to be honest.
I think there’s a difference between layers and nuance (possibly also darkness) and whatever Bond is. Above all, he’s just not current. You can tell he’s a character from a different era, he hasn’t really changed much over the decades. Women can be dark but let’s not be 1960s dark.
I don’t disagree. I have no interest in a female James Bond, or repurposing canonically male characters as women. It feels like getting hand-me-downs.
I want brand new stories with women characters who were written as women from the beginning. I want a whole wealth of those new stories.
Agreed, Rachel. How about an original idea, for a change? I’m so sick of reboots.
Have to agree with her. Recasting women within a male story like this just binds us. How about a new paradigm entirely? Also, we need to see the Bond stories for what they are–training videos for young males to learn how to mimic and express toxic male masculinity.
I agree with her and I don’t think that James Bond needs to be recast as a man of color either. Why not create a different original story that stars someone like Idris or Chiwetel; it can be done just look at the success of movies like: Kingsman, John Wick, etc
There are so many brilliant women and people of color, if given an opportunity I’m sure someone could come up with something more modern, fresher, and more interesting than James Bond.
I actually agree with she says here, and here’s why:
1.) A lot of what Bond’s behavior and ability to move through society as he does is linked to his male (and in some cases, white) privilege. He’s meant to appeal to (and in some ways, subvert) a very specific male fantasy. There’s no getting around the fact that a character’s gender significantly alters how they are perceived and have to interact with the world. Jane Bond is not at all going to be the same character as James Bond. She can do cool spy shit, but she’ll have a completely different story.
2.) Women deserve to get their own stories rather then the cast offs of what men give them.
I don’t get the let’s cast James Bond with a woman talk. I’m sick of the schtick of turning male characters into female characters. Why can’t we get an original female spy, one that’s hopefully not a big d-bag like Bond?
I think it could be played by anyone since it’s a rotating character anyway.