A Female James Bond Was More Likely Before Sean Connery Than After Daniel Craig

While the prospect of casting a woman as James Bond is seen by some as a radical modern step, the proposal was more likely to happen before the Sean Connery era than post-Daniel Craig. After Lashana Lynch pushed boundaries like never before with her portrayal of the first female 007, the possibility of seeing a female James Bond officially assume the spy mantle seemed closer than ever. However, even though it has now emerged that there were long-standing proposals for such an approach, the franchise’s reputation makes it unlikely.

For a long time, the notion of recasting James Bond as a woman was met with ridicule and open hostility in some circles. Although the logic behind such arguments is questionable, the vehement reaction every time the question is raised highlights that it remains a polarizing issue among the fan base. In an apparent refutation of these criticisms, revelatory information from early in the franchise’s history proves that having a female Bond is not as blasphemous as some claim. However, despite the new evidence, the prospect arguably seems more distant than ever.

James Bond’s Original Female Casting Plan Explained

A new biography of Ian Fleming reveals there were concrete plans for a female Bond as far back as the 1950s. In Ian Fleming: The Complete Man, author Nicholas Shakespeare wrote that producer Gregory Ratoff “had the arresting idea of having Bond played by a woman, Susan Hayward.” Given that the proposal predates Sean Connery’s Bond casting by several years, Ratoff’s plan would have meant that the first official screen version of the character would have been a woman.

Shakespeare’s evidence suggests that Ratoff’s vision was only one of several competing plans for the character. As the author explains (via IndeWire), “Ian (Fleming) had entertained several possibilities, from Richard Burton.., to James Stewart.., to James Mason.” However, after jointly purchasing the rights in 1955, Ratoff’s proposal cannot be dismissed as a complete impossibility and represents the start of a long-running debate about whether a woman should play Bond. Nevertheless, despite the idea’s long and legitimate history, the culture that has developed around Bond arguably makes such a move less likely than ever.

The James Bond Franchise Makes A Female Bond Difficult After Craig

As Ratoff’s thought process proves, there is clearly nothing wrong with casting a woman as James Bond. Given that he was one of the original two producers to have purchased the rights to the character from Fleming in 1955, he has serious pedigree when it comes to considering how Bond could and should be portrayed. However, while the precedent for a female Bond was potentially set before Sean Connery was cast in Dr. No, the cultural status that the James Bond franchise has acquired in the following 62 years makes such a radical recasting difficult to imagine in the immediate future.

Although more recent movies have attempted to reevaluate Bond’s relationship with women, the franchise’s earlier installments have cemented the character as an archetype of occasionally toxic masculinity. For all his heroism, his antiquated views have helped define Bond in the public consciousness, to the point where his brand of masculinity is seen by many as an essential part of the character. As the franchise has moved from strength to strength, this perception of Bond has only deepened. As a result, any change to his characterization is seen as almost sacrilegious – never mind anything as revolutionary as a woman playing the part.

The extent to which the traditional, iconic image of Bond influences the direction of the franchise becomes depressingly obvious every time the role’s incumbent is discussed. From the poisonous discourse around Idris Elba’s potential casting, which Elba himself labeled “disgusting“, to the outrage around Daniel Craig’s blonde hair before Casino Royale, there is a pervading conservatism that renders aspects of Bond’s image immutable for some viewers. The longer the franchise adheres to tradition, the stronger this sense becomes. While a female Bond would arguably be one of the best ways to re-energize the series, it would almost certainly prompt a reaction producers would want to avoid.

The James Bond Movies Are More Important Than The Books In Defining The Character

Even before the movies turned James Bond into one of the most popular fictional characters of all time, Ian Fleming’s novels had a huge following. Before the cinema, they were the only way for an audience to get an idea of Bond’s character, with the freedom of interpretation provided by literature allowing each reader to create their own image. Given that Ratoff’s plan was conceived before the first Connery movie, it’s clear that, despite Fleming’s traditional depiction of the character, the novels in isolation weren’t a major obstacle to imagining something as radical as a female Bond.

Considering the extent to which the stereotypical James Bond caricature has been seared into the public consciousness, it is increasingly clear that the cinematic franchise, rather than the original source material, is the biggest impediment to a woman taking on the part. As decades of blockbuster film-making reasserted the notion that Bond has to be portrayed in a particular way, any deviation became increasingly difficult. Now, 62 years after Dr. No, the febrility that erupts any time even the most modest adjustment is suggested proves that some changes within Bond are getting more difficult to enact, rather than easier.

James Bond’s Female Casting Is A Missed Opportunity

The hostility and controversy that would explode if the next James Bond was female likely mean that producers will shy away from rocking the boat. However, for all the negativity that would inevitably and regrettably emerge, the concept would be an ingenious and progressive way to take the character forward. There are plenty of cultural examples, from William Shakespeare’s canon to Doctor Who, where flipping gender roles can have a transformational effect on the story and characters, giving the material a new and welcome perspective. There is nothing unique about Bond to suggest a similar effect couldn’t be achieved.

There are also examples from within the James Bond series to suggest that changing the title character’s gender could enhance the story. Judi Dench’s casting as M for Goldeneye, for example, was a radical reinterpretation of a character who had hitherto always been male. In fact, she was pivotal in dragging the franchise into the burgeoning 21st Century, memorably labeling Brosnan’s Bond a “dinosaur” during their first meeting. Now that Dench is rightly regarded as an icon in the franchise’s history, it’s obvious that the franchise doesn’t require complete consistency from its main characters – with Bond himself no exception.

A Female Bond Is Still Possible, But Probably Not Yet

Even though public pressure and scrutiny makes it unlikely that the next James Bond will be a woman, there is still hope that a woman might assume the role at some point in the future. Particularly throughout Craig’s tenure, the franchise has demonstrated an awareness of the need to evolve, whether through the covert references to Bond’s sexuality in Skyfall or increased diversity of casting with the likes of Lynch and Naomie Harris. Although the movies are still broadly conservative, signs of progression are there. This, combined with the revelation that a female Bond has already been considered, means that hope is not completely extinguished.

Despite this tentative prospect, however, the evidence indicates that the next incumbent will be a much less provocative suggestion. While there has been no confirmation, reports indicate that 33-year-old Aaron Taylor-Johnson is the front-runner for the position. Although younger than many previous Bonds, he also satisfies many of the character’s traditional requirements, meaning that his casting would very much maintain the status quo. If confirmed, the news would greatly extend the wait for a female James Bond. However, as the 1950s plan proved, such a step can and should still be a consideration.