The James Bond franchise has been dominating global cinema since 1962, being one of the biggest UK money-making attractions of all time. Pierce Brosnan, Timothy Dalton and Sean Connery are just some of the actors who have portrayed the famous character, created by Ian Fleming, with Daniel Craig being the latest 007 to grace our screens.
But as Craig’s final Bond movie hits the cinemas, the debate has finally begun: Should 007 be a female character, moving forward?
Now, as controversial as this may seem, I don’t think this is the right direction for the franchise to go in. In a recent interview, when asked this very same question, Craig responded with “Why should a woman play James Bond, when there should be a part just as good as James Bond, but for a woman”? And I think he is asking the right question.
In the latest Bond film No Time To Die, the four leading ladies all go against the decades-old Bond girl stereotype of being a ‘damsel in distress’ . Lashana Lynch’s character even plays a 00 agent, and does so brilliantly. There is no competition between the women in this film, and they all use their screen time to meaningfully impact the storyline, not to mention bringing to life a lot of the action scenes.
There are characters in other series or films that have been portrayed differently over time or have had a gender change, some examples of this being Doctor Who and Bridgerton. However, James Bond is so deeply rooted in tradition as being played by a male, it seems it would be wrong to change what Fleming once envisioned and brought to life so well. It is a similar debate to Sherlock Holmes being played by a woman when really, sometimes there’s no particular reason for this, it just wouldn’t feel right.
Now don’t get me wrong, I am a feminist and I’m all here for women being empowered and well represented within the media. With the Bond films, there has historically been a lot of sexism that has thankfully improved over time, and the current female characters in the Bond universe are finally getting the representation they deserve. They have the power to save themselves without the help of a man. In my opinion, it would be far more interesting seeing where these existing female characters’ roles can be taken in the future, without throwing all that progress away to just have one female lead.
That said, I will admit, if there is ever going to be a significant revamp in the James Bond universe, now is definitely the time to do it. With Daniel Craig stepping down after 15 years of playing 007, it seems as though there are some big shoes waiting to be filled. Whether you agree or disagree with the next 007 being a woman, the casting decision on who is next in line will be revolutionary either way, and I can’t wait.
At the end of the day, only time will tell what James Bond’s future looks like.
Hannah Youds
~
In June 2017, Gal Gadot starred in the first Wonder Woman movie. In December 2017, Jodie Whittaker made her debut as the first female Dr Who. In May 2021, Little Miss Brave was introduced to the Mr Men collection.
Today, there is a lot of cultural progress as women are now becoming a larger voice in pop culture, as protagonists of their own stories rather than the stereotypical damsel in distress. Despite this, there is occasionally still an outcry when women take over characters previously reserved only for men. The disruption of Lashana Lynch’s takeover of Daniel Craig’s role as 007 is no exception. But in a world filled with Harry Potter not Harriet, and Luke Skywalker not Lucy, why isn’t it time for a woman to take over as 007?
James Bond is the archetypal, idolised male stereotype. Intelligent. Cool. Collected. Indestructible. Powerful. For decades, this character has been played by a man whilst the parts of beautiful, dependent, vulnerable characters have been reserved for women, strongly reinforcing stereotypical gender roles. This representation then causes stereotypes to strengthen which causes more representations to appear and so the cycle appears. Round and round and round and round.
You may, like Daniel Craig, ask: “why should a woman play James Bond when there should be a part just as good as James Bond, but for a woman?”, but it is more complex than that.
A female taking over as 007 is a statement. It breaks the cycle. It says that women do not need specialised treatment, and can take over the role of a man just as well – a message sometimes forgotten among the separation of football teams and women’s football teams, of business institutes and women’s business institutes.
The takeover says women aren’t prepared to be dismissed and it is time for our
intellect, composure, and power to be acknowledged as female traits. The immense fame of the James Bond films makes this statement a loud, strong one as it reaches out to all young women and says “yes, you can!”
, whereas creating a new spy for women specifically says that we are too intimidated to invade this space and politely suggests “maybe?”.
Films are a huge part of mass media and therefore have a huge influence over society. With this in mind, writers and directors should be aware of how better, more accurate representation can positively impact and inspire those who it represents. Films are not just modes of entertainment, they have power to change mindsets. That is why we need 007 to be taken over by a woman. We need a stir that will start a much bigger conversation, a conversation that has the ability to inspire a whole generation of young women.
Charlotte Crosby
