Ever hear of Idris Elba?
Apparently, he's a talented actor from across the pond in Great Britain; been in a number of stage and television productions, and films, among them a minor role familiar to American audiences as the gatekeeper in both Thor and Thor: The Dark World. But he must be very talented to get the good speculation from producers to be considered to play one of the most famous characters in film history: the suave and sophisticated British spy James Bond.
Would he be able to pull it off? Probably. But to those purists out there - and by "purist" I mean those people who want James Bond to be as close as possible to the character created by Ian Flemming - Elba couldn't do it because he's black.
Ian Flemming's Bond is a Scottish white male.
Unfortunately, the purists have been labeled as racists by our not-so-good friends on the left side of the fence, and their silly little lefty mouths just wont shut up about it. A black man has been put in the running to be the next James Bond, and any talk to the contrary has to be deemed as racist. "You're opposed to him playing the part because he's black, er African-Ameri...I mean, African-British...yeah, that's it...African-British, you racist!"
Fine then. The scenario can be flipped, can it? How about Gilbert Gottfried playing Frederick Douglass? Are you opposed to Paris Hilton playing George Washington Carver? What about Michael Moore playing the Zulu king Shaka? Not feasible, you say? Why?
|Shaka Zulu? Played by Michael Moore? NOT!|
"Well, you're talking about historical characters; James Bond was fictional, therefore he can be played by anyone, you racist!"
Wrong. First, this particular point is about a film role, and whether historical or not, it's all about a character in a film. So if a black man can be selected for a role meant for someone white, then the reverse can happen. Got a problem with it, libs? Personally, I would love to see Moore try to play Shaka. I would love to see Moore give up cheeseburgers or his silly liberalism, but fat chance on any of that happening anytime soon.
Second, liberals distort history, and film is no exception. In the court case State of New Jersey v. John List, the prosecutor was a white female (Eleanor Clark); in the film Judgement Day: The John List Story, she was played by a black female (Lorena Gale). That's just one example, but I only need one. Isn't James Bond just one character? You libs can count, or did Common Core harm some brain cells?
Third, James Bond is more historical than fictional. He was based on Flemming's exploits as a military intelligence officer in the Royal Navy during World War II; his boss, an admiral, formed the basis of the character known as "M". Together and with others, they helped devise the plan known as "Mincemeat", which had succeeded in removing a large number of German troops from Sicily, allowing the Allied invasion of that island in 1943, and all based on the finding of bogus documents found on a corpse planted in the waters off Spain. I wouldn't care if Flemming's James Bond is played by Elba or anyone else, except Michael Moore; Elba could probably do an outstanding job, while Moore is gaining...
And Fourth. There's Hollywood itself. The whole film industry is controlled by liberals, just like the looney tunes nut-jobs who whine about any opposition to Idris Elba being James Bond as racist. But, just what is it that we hear coming from their own mouths?
"Hollywood is soooooooooo racist! I can't get a decent acting job on the tee-vee because Hollywood is soooooooo racist!"
From the liberal Huff Post.
From the Atlanta Black Star.
From the very-liberal Chris Rock.
Or just "Google-it". Lots of entries here.
Hollywood is so racist because it's the racist liberals who run it. Fat chance of that changing anytime soon.