This has been debated before in terms of actors most likely to, and Bond's ethnicity (irrelevant), his sexuality (some portrayals could work against the character's, well, character), etc etc. now that Daniel Craig is known to be leaving the franchise, up pops Tom Hardy as a leading contender.
So, given that in Fleming's books, Bond is the suave, well dressed groomed representative of HM Government, would a scruffy, tattoed, straggly bearded Bond work? or is appearance (like ethicity) totally irrelevant?
If the first Bond in 62 was black and all the subsequent actors were black I would say it was wrong to put a white actor up for the role of the latest Bond.
The films have veered off such a long way from the books anyway that it's not important but it's fairly clear the original intention was it was a very British white guy. I just don't see that continuing to want it played by a white guy is prejudiced. Almost to the point that anyone who suggests a white actor is just that.
We're trying to impose a first half 20th century quintessentially English character into a multicultural 21st century scenario. I doubt Flemming conceived such a scenario but I for one don't care whether he's black or white (or somewhere in between), as long as the storyline and acting are Bond quality.
Well imo it is wrong.
What you have to also consider is that I do like continuity and I am still struggling with the fact that Coronation Street has had 3 ... yes 3 (I know unbelievable isn't it?) Nick Tilsleys ... wrong I tell thee, wrong!