@soul_starter: "to please a bunch of men who can't grow up is silly and counter intuitive to the central message"
Yes, ignoring canon and annoying your core audience, which actually provides you with the money to fund your franchise is an excellent business strategy. Well done.
@zmanbarzel: "...which is apparently so unimportant to the character that he has been portrayed by an Australian and Irishman."
You do know that the nationality of the actor playing the role has no bearing on the character itself, right? We as the audience, could still believe that Pierce Brosnan and George Lazenbey could still believe they were white, British males. You should look up the concept of the fourth wall.
Angelina Jolie (an American) played Lara Croft (a Brit). Lara Croft was still British in everyone's eyes despite the fact she was being played by an American.
The point is, when you change certain fundamentals about the character itself, such as gender or race, well that's a problem for long time fans of said character, because said character is no longer the person they have come to know and love. They are unrecognisable to them. I'm sure it would be quite jarring for you if your best male friend suddenly turned up at your house as a woman. Not through a sex change or anything, he has just magically turned into a woman. And you think you're going nuts because he's there trying to tell you that he has ALWAYS been a woman.
@monkey_shines: Picking him for the role should have nothing at all to do with the colour of his skin. I just don't think he's that good an actor. I don't understand why you think he has the right style either, he's never been very good at playing the badass, he was awful in Luther. That said, he was good in The Wire, but even so, I just don't think he'd make a good Bond. He would overcook it in my opinion.
Domiddian's comments