We're all bored of the company speak that goes along with marketing any major project, not just in Hollywood but in the world of sports, TV, etc. There are standard-issue responses that are always given so as to paint the franchise in the best possible light: "I'm working with some great people and the fans will be really happy". Blah. So when somebody breaks that mold it tends to get a lot of attention. Unfortunately for the people behind the James Bond estate, the recent comments by author Anthony Horowitz are exactly why some should stick to the talking points.
Horowitz, who has penned the next official 007 novel, hilariously-titled Triggor Mortis (*chuckle), spoke to Daily Mail and was asked about the future of the Bond franchise once Daniel Craig departs. While Idris Elba has long been the fan favorite, making him the first black James Bond ever, Horowitz doesn't think he'd be a good choice. It's his reasons why that are drawing some negative heat...
"Idris Elba is a terrific actor, but I can think of other black actors who would do it better. "For me, Idris Elba is a bit too rough to play the part. It’s not a colour issue. I think he is probably a bit too 'street' for Bond. Is it a question of being suave? Yeah."
On what planet is Elba not suave? Even when he was playing criminal Stringer Bell on The Wire he was always the coolest guy in the room, and could hardly be classified as "street".
On the plus side, Horowitz did name British actor Adrian Lester as a good choice, and he's a terrific actor who has appeared in Love's Labour's Lost, The Day After Tomorrow. and BBC series Hustle. Horowitz may want to pick his words a bit better when it comes to issues like this, but calling his comments "casually racist" as Vulture did may be going too far.
Horowitz continued by ripping Sam Mendes' take on 007 which has the secret agent affected on a persona level that we've never been before....
"'Skyfall' is my least favourite. I know it is heresy to say so, but it is the one Bond film I have never liked," he said. "Bond is weak in it. He has doubts. That’s not Bond. Secondly, the villain wins. The villain sets out to kill M — the film finishes with the villain killing M. So why have I watched it? And if you have to protect the Head of MI6 from a madman, do you take her to a Scottish farmhouse with no weapons? And tell your bad guy where you are, so he will arrive with six people to kill her? And then M escapes and stands on top of a hill waving a torch to tell them where she is! It’s that sort of thing that made me angry."
And he doesn't seem to be too thrilled about Spectre, either, which promises to be a deeper look at Bond's past...
"I’m looking at the trailer and I am seeing a photograph of Bond’s family. The mum and the dad are in there and their faces are missing because the picture has been burned in a fire. This is going to be to do with his family background, and I know the fans are all terribly excited to know more, but I’m saying, 'Don’t tell me, I don’t want to know,' I don’t want to know about his doubts, his insecurities or weaknesses. I just want to see him act, kill, win."
