My Case for a Black Bond: Adding Some Color to the 007 Franchise

Already, there’s been criticism that hiring a half-Jamaican was a cynical move to bring a little color to the otherwise monochrome James Bond cast. The 007 producers refute that; but it does highlight an opportunity they missed in 2006 to really rock the politically correct boat; casting the series’ first black Bond.

Now this may surprise readers of my column, who know I’m no fan of affirmative action, but I honestly think MGM missed a trick when they chickened out of replacing Pierce Brosnan with a Bond of color – and here’s why:

It all started in 1969.

That was the year Sean Connery decided he’d had enough playing Britain’s most iconic secret agent and handed in his resignation notice. EON productions, the makers of the ridiculously successful James Bond movies, were stuck with the insurmountable task of finding a replacement.

In the end, they picked virtual unknown Australian George Lazenby; and wrote him into the franchise with an elaborate back-story that involved James Bond undergoing plastic surgery to disguise his identity.

A great idea that director Peter Hunt threw out on the first day of filming.

Instead of pretending that Lazenby was the same Bond from the previous movies, Hunt instead scripted a throwaway line in which Lazenby complained, “This never happened to the other fella.” In doing so, he gave birth to a Bond theory that perpetuates to this day.

The idea is simple: That instead of each new actor taking the role of the same James Bond – an aristocratic, Eton-educated Scotsman – they’re each separate individuals who merely adopt the name and number, James Bond, 007, when their predecessor comes to a sticky end (man eating sharks, laser beams or, worst of all, settling down with a wife and kids).

Sounds far-fetched? It shouldn’t. After all, how else do you explain Bond’s constantly evolving face, accent and age? In fact, the theory ties in beautifully with the rebooted Bond movies, as Daniel Craig’s tough-as-nails secret agent is supposed to be still learning the ropes, despite officially being “on the job” since 1962.

In fact, it’s a ploy the Bond crew has used several times before. After all, introducing Tony-award winning actress Judi Dench to the patriarchal role of M in 1995 indicated that certain names, titles and positions within the British Secret Service were passed from one person to another.

Just look at Bond’s opposite number in the CIA; in more than twenty James Bond movies, American secret agent Felix Leiter has only been played by the same actor twice before (and he got eaten by a shark one of those times). It seems straightforward to believe that Felix Leiter is just as transferable an identity as James Bond, 007 might be.

Which brings us back to the series first black Bond.

Fans of Pierce Brosnan’s tenure as 007 might remember suave MI6 Chief of Staff Charles Robinson popping up in exposition scenes. He was played by black British actor Colin Salmon who was ranked as one of People magazine’s “Most Beautiful” in 1993.

Handsome, capable and aristocratic, Salmon’s character was the perfect foil to Brosnan’s Bond; and every bit his equal. That’s why there was serious discussion about him adopting the 007 title when Pierce Brosnan tendered his resignation in 2006.

Ultimately, MGM decided to pass on the idea, instead picking Daniel Craig for the role. There were many reasons for doing so, I imagine, but race was undoubtedly one of the more significant.

After all, Bond purists wailed in anguish enough when Craig was chosen, complaining that a blond Bond was in contrast to the dark and dangerous character Ian Fleming had envisioned. Imagine how they’d have reacted if Colin Salmon had been chosen?

But I argue that anybody who really appreciates the Bond ethosshould have embraced the move. After all, Bond is always much more about the man than the color of his skin. Out of all the adjectives you’d use to describe 007 – tough, resourceful, suave, dangerous and deadly – none of them refer to his ethnicity.

As I mentioned above, I’m very much opposed to affirmative action or picking somebody for a task based purely on the color of their skin, but choosing Colin Salmon to play Bond would have been none of those things. Ignoring his ethnicity, as hopefully any casting agent would have done, there were some seriously sound reasons why he was the most logical choice to play the rebooted Bond:

• He had a four-film history with the Bond franchise.
• He was younger, tougher and more handsome than the departing Bond – an ideal replacement.
• He was everything Ian Fleming’s character was supposed to be – suave, charming, dangerous and deadly. Everything, in fact, except white.

I would never condone picking anybody for a role just to be politically correct or fit in with society’s post-modernist expectations, but that was why it was so frustrating to see Colin Salmon passed over for the role he was born to play.

It perhaps identifies what’s most wrong with systems like affirmative action and positive discrimination: That the most qualified candidate is often overlooked because companies want to give the illusion of diversity; or the opposite, avoiding being accused of cynically choosing somebody merely for the color of their skin.

It reduces everybody to their ethnicity first, their aptitude second, and everybody gets screwed as a result.

If you need proof, just look at the reaction Naomie Harris is getting after announcing her casting as the new Miss Moneypenny. For every piece of praise thrown in her direction, there are ugly accusations that she was only picked to “add some color to the cast.” That’s insulting, not just because she’s a tremendous actress, but also because the role of Miss Moneypenny could theoretically be no less interchangeable as that of M, Felix Leiter or possibly even James Bond, 007 himself.

Ignore Naomie Harris’ skin tone for a second and you’ll see that she’s a natural choice to play Moneypenny. She’s smart, sassy, capable and sexy. MGM pictures made the right decision in hiring here.

It’s just a pity we couldn’t have been quite so open minded when Colin Salmon submitted his resume to become Bond’s replacement. I think we’d all have been treated to some fantastic movies if he had.