You must find it very painful to support Palace with the large number of black players in the sqaud. The number has been increasing over the last 20-30 years. Must make you shudder everytime they come put on the pitch.

Just decide between Jason Stratham or Gerard Butler. ‘The name is Bond, James f***ing Bond”

Most certainly not European.

Actually, a very provocative and antagonistic post which is clearly a personal attack on me and nothing to do with the next James Bond.

People worship fictional characters.

James Bond is based largely on Fleming himself so he is as real in that sense as other semi mythical creations.

Thing is that established literary characters stop being themselves if you change them too much.
Imagine if Sherlock Holmes became a Woman or Ebeneeza Scrooge became Asian. It would make no sense.
The same applies to James Bond. I don't see how this is a difficult concept to grasp really.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (12 Aug 2018 8.22pm)

I think we enter into a sense of the ridiculous when real people in history are played by people of different ethnicity. What is the point unless you simply don't have actors of the correct ethnicity?
In the old days, 'foreign' characters were played by British actors because there just weren't any foreign actor available. Nowadays that is no longer a problem.
Obviously, large parts of European history have not featured too many Black people for obvious reasons. It is a problem when casting Black characters in historical drama since you often have to invent Black characters. History has happened and attempts to rewrite it are unwise, I would suggest, even for drama.

With fictional characters, they never existed, so it comes down to the credibility, authenticity and sometimes the expectation of an established character as written and intended.

It is double standards when we have such an over the top reaction to White people playing non White characters when the reverse is somehow seen as progress.

Sorry but that is simply not the case. China, Japan, India, Argentina, Mexico all had a well established film history back in "The Old Days". There were and are plenty of actors around, from all backrounds.

How does any actor get there first job? They audition. Any director could audition anyone, so there was no need to get a white british actor doing a poor impression of an indian to play any such role.

Having said that, films are of their time The way films are cast now is not the same as it was them, even though some things are still the same.

The people who make the films always want to make films about themselves and their own experiance. Hollywood makes the films that reflect the makers. Chinese film tells stories about chinese themes. African film is about their experiance. When film makers start to portray people other than themselves, it shows those people what the film makers think of them and most of the time, it's not a lot because it's not their experiance or they have an agenda for the movie.

I think what people don't like, from any backround, is when people try to tell other peoples stories, claiming that it's authentic or creating a sterotype for a particular group that has little basis in reality

In regards to history, Black people, Indians, Chinese, they all have a history. The film industry has always made films set in lots of locations all over the world. It really depends on what stories you want to tell.

I agree about Idris though. I just don't see how you re-create the Bond history without tearing it up and taking it in another direction. In which case, it wouldn't be bond.

Finally...

History has happened and attempts to rewrite it are unwise, I would suggest, even for drama.

Hollywood has been re-writing peoples history since it's inception. Some even view it as a learning tool.

"You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead"

Stan Laurel