Back in the 1950s, James Bond was a very different beast. It wasn't a long-standing film series that lasted decades, featured countless leading stars, and one that was almost a mascot for Britain. In fact, in the 1950s, James Bond struggled, so much so that there were talks to see the lead role handed off to a female lead instead.
This was revealed in the upcoming biography of James Bond author Ian Fleming by the writer Nicholas Shakespeare. As per IndieWire, it was stated that due to the struggling performances of both Thunderball and Casino Royale, there were plans to bring in Susan Hayward as the new lead ahead of the creation of Dr. No, an idea that sprouted from the mind of producer Gregory Ratoff.
Considering there was quite a bit of backlash ahead of the latest film (No Time to Die) arriving due to Lashana Lynch taking over just the 007 moniker (not even becoming James Bond) because of Bond's retirement, this no doubt would have opened a whole different can of worms especially considering how much less progressive society was six decades ago.
Speaking about the plan, Shakespeare writes, "Since the mid-1950s, many well-known actors had been approached. Gregory Ratoff had the arresting idea of having Bond played by a woman, Susan Hayward. Ian had entertained several possibilities, from Richard Burton ('I think that Richard Burton would be by far the best James Bond'), to James Stewart ('I wouldn't at all mind him as Bond if he can slightly anglicise his accent'), to James Mason ('We might have to settle for him')."
While it's unclear what the future will hold for James Bond, co-producer Barbara Broccoli has affirmed in the past that Bond will always be a male character, but surely that doesn't mean we won't see a female 007 again down the line, right?