James Bond: Judi Dench, The Catholic Thing & The Future

On the occasion of the franchise being sold to Amazon MGM Studios, let’s talk Bond, James Bond.

My Favorite “Bond Girl”

FWIW, my favorite “Bond girl” is Judi Dench, who became Bond’s boss, nicknamed M, in GoldenEye (1995), when Pierce Brosnan played the part.

The relationship between M and Bond represented an understanding of the dynamic between a strong man and his female leader. It’s not romantic, but, mostly under Brosnan’s successor, Daniel Craig, it is maternal — which, to a character that’s an orphan, resonates deeply.

I enjoyed Sean Connery, Roger Moore (my first Bond) and Brosnan, who was born to play the part — but I also really liked Daniel Craig. As Bond, he was broody and powerful, but also humorous and not without heart.

And while some Bond fans loathed it, I didn’t necessarily mind the female characters becoming more than cute nicknames and momentary objects of lust. It added depth to Bond’s character and to the storytelling.

In particular, Dench’s M managed to exhibit guts and powerful leadership without sacrificing the feminine.

Dench’s M’s verbal fencing with Bond, with its undercurrent of a kind of mother love, albeit an (overtly, at least) unsentimental one, was sharp and satisfying. Her death in Bond’s arms in Skyfall made it one of my favorite Bond films.

The Catholic Thing

BTW, Skyfall brought up some of Bond’s backstory, that his ancestors were recusant Scottish Catholics, and had a priest hole in their remote Highlands mansion, along with a tunnel that led to a distant chapel.

That was cool.

And it’s not just Craig.

From a piece in The Catholic Herald:

Digging a little deeper we find the scene in For Your Eyes Only (1981) where Roger Moore’s Bond goes to confession. Admittedly it’s in a Greek Orthodox Church, and is a liaison with Q; but nevertheless he clearly knows the form, entering the box and intoning “Forgive me father for I have sinned,” solemnly. (“That’s putting it mildly, 007,” Q replies).

Also, in 2015’s Spectre, Craig’s Bond suggests he had a choice between his current path and becoming a priest.

And if you think about it, both priests and super-spies give up the idea of a normal family life to pursue an all-encompassing vocation to save others (OK, I won’t stretch this comparison too far, especially since we’re talking about James Bond).

Issues of sexual morality seldom intruded on any Bond other than Timothy Dalton’s and Craig’s versions, who formed some actual relationships.

Bond did get married once, in the book and movie of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, starring one-off lead George Lazenby (to a character played by Diana Rigg) — but he quickly became a widower.

So, neither series creator Ian Fleming nor the character were entirely averse to matrimony … not that it ever slowed down Bond’s conquests.

Bond’s questionable morality did turn off some Catholics. From the National Catholic Register:

Bond was a self-sufficient hero who answered to no one, and who seemingly had a preternatural ability to triumph over men, and women. Since 1962, Bond has straddled world cinema like a Colossus, and the moviegoing public has never ceased to gaze upon his hollow glamor.

Such a screen character, even just a few years earlier in 1950s, would have been deemed contemptible. Interestingly, the Irish actor Patrick McGoohan was asked to consider playing the role. A devout Catholic, he turned it down due to the character’s immorality. Earlier, another Catholic, author Paul Johnson, reviewing the Fleming novels had criticized them for pandering to the worst in readers.

IMHO, Bond’s womanizing is generally not very interesting (but then, I’m not a guy), with the exception of one woman he doesn’t bed — fellow MI6 staffer Miss Moneypenny.

Her exact feelings about Bond depend on the movie, but it remains platonic. They flirt and joke, but it’s evident that he respects her. And you get the distinct feeling that if anybody tried to harm Moneypenny, Bond would willingly sacrifice himself to save her.

Whether they meant it or not, the filmmakers hit upon something good and true, which went even further when Dench’s M came in.

Bond Is Dead, Long Live Bond

Many Bond fans want him to remain essentially a comic-book character, just a vehicle for spectacle and mayhem without any kind of real inner life.

But, a spy’s personal story is part of the appeal of the genre — the tension between living a human life and the institutionalized lie that is espionage. Is Bond just stunts and sex, or is there also room for real spycraft?

There could be a way to do that.

Craig’s Bond is definitely dead (and he sacrificed himself in No Time to Die to save the world, but also for the woman he loved and their child, which is as it should be), so we can really start over.

The last couple of Bond films emphasized that modern espionage is more about keyboards than guns. That’s just a fact. Today’s 007 is more likely to have a laptop and a drone than a Walther P99 and an Aston-Martin.

So, you could go retro Bond, put him back in the book era of the 1950s and early ’60s — Beatles, Carnaby Street, Cold War — and there’s an argument to be made for that. You’d lose the cool tech (unless you steampunk it), but it could be blue and gritty, a little rock ‘n roll.

Maybe Bond could not be just an indifferent, slickly womanizing hound dog but more of the lone wolf, who gives his heart to no one (but occasionally wishes he could). More Eastwood than Moore. That kind of a character appeals to women and men.

Mostly, we all like really meaty stories — and they’re not limited to just the drama genre.

To me, the greatest joy of the Marvel Infinity Saga wasn’t all the whizbang superhero stuff, but the redemption arc of Tony Stark (wrote a whole piece on it). Otherwise, there’s no soul.

Anything that sucks the soul out of a story should be avoided. Nothing substitutes for it.

So, this might be the moment for retro Bond, but not a superficial, Austin Powers-ish Bond. Let’s make Bond big and fun and action-y, but also a bit dark and rough. We have the movie tech to pull off a period actioner.

I want bad guys, good guys, traitors, double agents, dead drops and chase scenes — and the soundtrack would be awesome.

Now that Jennifer Salke has departed her job as head of Amazon MGM Studios, and Amy Pascal and David Heyman — who worked on the Spider-Man and Harry Potter films — have been announced as taking over the Bond franchise, we should be hearing something before long.

But Who Should Play Bond?

There’s a knee-jerk reaction in Hollywood that any white male character should be played by an actor that’s anything but. Honestly, that’s just dumb.

Gender or race-swapping adds nothing, unless it’s organic to the story (and let’s be honest, it nearly never is). Humans are not interchangeable Lego parts.

If that’s done to Bond, it’ll fail. Straight up. Bond casting has to make sense internally and in context of the larger story.

I always wanted Idris Elba. He may not be white, but he’s male and British, and he has the kind of looks, physicality and gravitas that would be great for the role. He would embody the spirit of Bond, if not every single external characteristic.

This is NOT a real trailer, but I kind of wish it was:

Obviously, for my thought of a retro Bond, Elba wouldn’t work — unless you want to live in some kind of an alternate-universe early ’60s, as in the short-lived Batman spinoff Pennyworth (where it worked well).

Actually, Jack Bannon, who starred in Pennyworth, wouldn’t be a bad choice.

In the end, it’ll probably be an unknown with a manageable salary quote, to leave room for all the locations and special effects. Reports have suggested that, thankfully, Bond will continue to be male and British.

I’ve already thrown in for Elba, so, for fun, here are a few more suggestions.

Henry Golding

Of English and Malay descent, Golding has a great look, the physical aspects and the accent. I’ve only seen him in Crazy Rich Asians, so I don’t know if he can handle a gun or do stunts, but I could see him in the part.

Tom Hiddleston

British, Shakespearean actor, able to do stunts, elegant, smooth and once recited an Othello soliloquy for me.

Theo James

British (with a dash of Greek ancestry), somehow rugged and pretty at the same time, has done action, looks good in a tux.

Henry Cavill

Yes, he’s been Superman, and he’s absurdly good looking, but I first saw him in The Tudors, where he brought real heart to his role as one of Henry VIII’s noble running buddies. I think he’s been criminally underused and could definitely do the role.

Andrew Garfield

He’s got a lighter energy that I would immediately think of for Bond, but I could be talked into it.

Orlando Bloom

He’s grown up a lot since he was my favorite Tolkien elf, so this may be his moment.

Chris Hemsworth or Liam Hemsworth

Yeah, they’re Aussies, but both can talk Brit. Physicality is on point, can do action, can act, also got a nice sense of humor. Either of these brothers could be licensed to kill (and there’s a bonus third one).