Advertisement
UK markets closed
  • FTSE 100

    7,877.05
    +29.06 (+0.37%)
     
  • FTSE 250

    19,450.67
    +110.53 (+0.57%)
     
  • AIM

    744.99
    +1.87 (+0.25%)
     
  • GBP/EUR

    1.1691
    +0.0024 (+0.21%)
     
  • GBP/USD

    1.2465
    +0.0008 (+0.07%)
     
  • Bitcoin GBP

    50,994.93
    +2,660.13 (+5.50%)
     
  • CMC Crypto 200

    885.54
    0.00 (0.00%)
     
  • S&P 500

    5,044.60
    +22.39 (+0.45%)
     
  • DOW

    37,976.08
    +222.77 (+0.59%)
     
  • CRUDE OIL

    82.54
    -0.15 (-0.18%)
     
  • GOLD FUTURES

    2,397.60
    +9.20 (+0.39%)
     
  • NIKKEI 225

    38,079.70
    +117.90 (+0.31%)
     
  • HANG SENG

    16,385.87
    +134.03 (+0.82%)
     
  • DAX

    17,837.40
    +67.38 (+0.38%)
     
  • CAC 40

    8,023.26
    +41.75 (+0.52%)
     

I agree with Daniel Craig: we don’t need a female James Bond

 (Natasha Pszenicki)
(Natasha Pszenicki)

Glancing at a headline yesterday which read “Daniel Craig does not believe James Bond should be a woman”, I found myself instinctively going into feminist defence mode.

This despite the fact I have never been interested in the Bond franchise — when I see 007 it registers little more than a telephone area code — I felt the need to die on the slightly intellectually lazy hill that it is absolutely integral to the emancipation of women that we are able to play archaic, misogynistic and somewhat boring film characters.

When I read the actual article, however, it turns out Craig was making a much more nuanced point which had been misrepresented. Speaking to Radio Times, he said that “there should simply be better parts for women and actors of colour”.

ADVERTISEMENT

Here’s what he actually said. “Why should a woman play James Bond when there should be a part just as good as James Bond, but for a woman?” After Craig’s comments a few years ago that he would rather “slash his wrists” than do another Bond film, I should have known he wouldn’t be taking up the mantle that we must preserve the sacred masculinity of the franchise for the sake of tradition.

His argument is actually a pretty compelling one. Instead of trying to crowbar a woman into this role, he is arguing that an original character better than James Bond should be written for a woman, creating space to carve out a new cultural phenomenon on par with Bond.

I do understand the allure of wanting women to be able to play iconic characters, but something about ‘Jane Bond’ does feel lazy and uncreative.

I am just not particularly fussed about taking a chauvinistic male character and having a woman play it — we are better and far more interesting than that.

Having said that, seeing the hilarious uproar about the casting of a black female 007 in the latest Bond film No Time to Die, maybe it would be worth having a female Bond purely to see the reaction.

I personally find Bond a tired narrative so for me the most entertaining thing about it wouldn’t be the film itself but the defensive howls of outrage it would provoke. I would certainly get the popcorn out for that.

What do you think about the idea of a female James Bond? Let us know in the comments below.

Read More

Sean Connery’s James Bond was a rapist, says No Time To Die director

Everyman cinemas hoping for James Bond boost as admissions recover

William and Kate to join Charles and Camilla at No Time To Die premiere