The Female 007 and the Women of 'No Time to Die'

1235733

Comments

  • Posts: 2,415
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Code-name is temporarily transferred to another agent. Most fans wouldn't think much of it. But somehow since that agent is black and a woman, that has people angry. Just racist and sexist people.

    So, only black women are allowed to doubt or criticize the decision?

    So the issue isn't that Bond is no longer 007, that's absolutely fine? The problem is that his desk gets taken by someone else
    Correct. 007 is someone else than James Bond. That is my issue. White male, black woman, frenchspeaking asian midget - doesn't matter - it is someone else.

    Are you okay with Batman or Spider-Man being anyone else other than Bruce Wayne or Peter Parker?

    No, I am not okay with that. I am not a fan of toying with the identity of well established characters.
  • mtmmtm
    edited July 15 Posts: 203
    mtm wrote: »
    I think, to be fair, a big factor in her casting was that Stella Rimmington had been the real-life head of MI5 just prior to the Bond films returning, and they were making a nod towards that.
    Because -and it'll be a shock to some of you- women are actually spies too! :)
    But you know very well a lot of the people are annoyed not because Nomi is a spy (I mean... Paula Caplan existed in the 60's... Agent Triple X existed in the 70's...) but the idea of her taking the 007 away from Bond.

    Some of them say that, yes; some of them are clearly offended because of her gender and background. I don't understand either point of view: I can't imagine anything less important than which codename Bond is operating under when you're watching a thrilling action scene.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited July 15 Posts: 1,528
    Zekidk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Code-name is temporarily transferred to another agent. Most fans wouldn't think much of it. But somehow since that agent is black and a woman, that has people angry. Just racist and sexist people.

    So, only black women are allowed to doubt or criticize the decision?

    So the issue isn't that Bond is no longer 007, that's absolutely fine? The problem is that his desk gets taken by someone else
    Correct. 007 is someone else than James Bond. That is my issue. White male, black woman, frenchspeaking asian midget - doesn't matter - it is someone else.

    Are you okay with Batman or Spider-Man being anyone else other than Bruce Wayne or Peter Parker?

    No, I am not okay with that. I am not a fan of toying with the identity of well established characters.

    M, Moneypenny, Felix. All "toyed" with and all successful.
  • Posts: 444
    mtm wrote: »
    Some of them say that, yes; some of them are clearly offended because of her gender and background. I don't understand either point of view: I can't imagine anything less important than which codename Bond is operating under when you're watching a thrilling action scene.
    I mean, it's a 60 year old franchise in which he has been interchangeable with the number 007. I get the resistance in a way. Again the question I post is this: if she gets the number taken away from her, is that really a great look for her character? If she keeps the number for good, will the fanbase move on with it?

  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited July 15 Posts: 1,528
    Also if the decision to give the codename 007 to a black female woman, whose to say it's more complex than just political influence. The movie industry is about providing entertainment for any audience. Making decisions about your movie to influence the outcome of the success isn't a bad thing. That's moviemaking. You make something you believe in and something you feel people will resonate with and hope people enjoy it.

    For example, it's known that having good representation and having your main characters be of a realistic and multicultural ethnicity works well for cinema. Despite everything Captain Marvel did great at the box-office, making just over what Skyfall made and Black Panther making even more than that. So why wouldn't the producers and writers over at EON think...

    "Hold on, our franchise is having trouble resonating with modern audiences How can we do this?"

    Oh it's obvious. We have more representation for our main characters, not just physically but actually doing more with the characters and changing up the dynamic.
  • doubleonothingdoubleonothing Los Angeles Moderator
    Posts: 858
    Look, here’s the thing. If it’s not about race or gender then it’s simply that people don’t like the re-attribution of Bond’s number. If that’s the case, realise that Fleming stripped bond of his 00 number and gave him a new designation for an entire novel. That’s the guy that created him. Then Horowitz made it so 007 took on the number from a previous agent in Forever and a Day. There have been several different 00 agents with the same number in the films, games, and novels. So, there’s precedent already.

    But let’s not forget the main thing here: Danjaq own the cinematic Bond and they decide what to do with that character, not you. What makes you naysayers think you know better than a business that’s been successfully running the franchise for over half a century? When you stamp your feet about something like this you just come off as childish because you’re not getting your way. Because it’s not going the way you think it should. You’re fans, experts even. But do you know what’s best for Bond? What qualifies you to say what should be done above those who have made it their lives work? At the end of the day, it’s your opinion and you’re welcome to express it, but it doesn’t make it right or factual.

    But this is all assuming you are honest when you say “it’s nothing to do with gender or race”, but when race and gender are continually used in your arguments then it’s hard to believe it’s not a problem for you.
  • ResurrectionResurrection You don't need to be an operative to see the obvious
    Posts: 1,018
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    If her race/gender have nothing to do with it, why are you saying these so-called 'SJW's would be interested in it?

    I can't make it more clear than that

    Okay, so you are saying you have a problem with her race and gender. Gotcha.
    mtm wrote: »
    Are you saying you think they're trying to launch a new series and replace Bond as the lead? I genuinely can't understand what you're trying to say.

    You are always confuse, read it completely then you might be able to understand.
    I said "If" they try to make her 007 or replace bond or Nomi as 007.

    Why on earth are you worried about that? They're not replacing Bond. You're worried about something entirely in your own head. And you seem to be scared of it, which is even more worrying.
    I never said that, you are the one always assuming things. I have no issue with her gender/race.

    But you think it's pandering to these SJWs because of her race/gender, clearly, otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned it. And you have a problem with that. So clearly there is a race/gender problem here for you.
    I simply stated an idea if they make a film/Netflix series on her I would be okay with it. Learn to read .

    And what's that got to do with anything? If you have no problem with a new character, what's the issue? She's not replacing James Bond.

    Sorry can't make it more clearer than that, if you can't understand it it's your problem not mine. Not responding you anymore. Bye :-h

    I think if you can't justify or explain your thoughts without confronting that they come from a place of prejudice, then it really is your problem rather than mine. You're going to find it harder and harder to live in this world if you can't accept people of colour and different genders.

    Same here...good luck

    'Same here'..? Yeah, I was describing you... ?
    Is English your first language? Genuine question.

    I said same here because I was suggesting the same thing you suggested to me, you ignored my comments and take out chunks of it and start criticising me by calling me racist. When I have clarified many times that I am not. Just because I don't get along with you does that means I will find it harder and harder to live with others. You are the one kept pushing me to explain everything why should I explain everything to you ? who are you? It's you who needed to understand when someone politely ask you that they don't want to talk to you anymore. It's called living peacefully by having different opinions. You have a harder time living with people if you start name calling or put any childish remark on them or pushing them to comment if they don't want to respond to you.
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    If her race/gender have nothing to do with it, why are you saying these so-called 'SJW's would be interested in it?

    I can't make it more clear than that

    Okay, so you are saying you have a problem with her race and gender. Gotcha.
    mtm wrote: »
    Are you saying you think they're trying to launch a new series and replace Bond as the lead? I genuinely can't understand what you're trying to say.

    You are always confuse, read it completely then you might be able to understand.
    I said "If" they try to make her 007 or replace bond or Nomi as 007.

    Why on earth are you worried about that? They're not replacing Bond. You're worried about something entirely in your own head. And you seem to be scared of it, which is even more worrying.
    I never said that, you are the one always assuming things. I have no issue with her gender/race.

    But you think it's pandering to these SJWs because of her race/gender, clearly, otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned it. And you have a problem with that. So clearly there is a race/gender problem here for you.
    I simply stated an idea if they make a film/Netflix series on her I would be okay with it. Learn to read .

    And what's that got to do with anything? If you have no problem with a new character, what's the issue? She's not replacing James Bond.

    Sorry can't make it more clearer than that, if you can't understand it it's your problem not mine. Not responding you anymore. Bye :-h

    I think if you can't justify or explain your thoughts without confronting that they come from a place of prejudice, then it really is your problem rather than mine. You're going to find it harder and harder to live in this world if you can't accept people of colour and different genders.

    Same here...good luck

    'Same here'..? Yeah, I was describing you... ?
    Is English your first language? Genuine question.

    I said same here because I was suggesting the same thing you suggested to me, you ignored my comments and take out chunks of it and start criticising me by calling me racist. When I have clarified many times that I am not. Just because I don't get along with you does that means I will find it harder and harder to live with others. You are the one kept pushing me to explain everything why should I explain everything to you ? who are you? It's you who needed to understand when someone politely ask you that they don't want to talk to you anymore. It's called living peacefully by having different opinions. You have a harder time living with people if you start name calling or put any childish remark on them or pushing them to comment if they don't want to respond to you.

    I just asked you to explain but you refuse; you don't have to explain but then you're the one choosing to give your opinions here. It seems strange to sudden to refuse to explain them. You use this language like 'SJWs' etc. and then say you're not prejudiced... it's all a bit contradictory. If you think you're not acting from a place of prejudice, then fine. I'm finding it hard to believe from what you've said so far, but as you say: it's your problem rather than mine.

    I refuse to explain because I explain it Many times but you choose to ignore and keep asking again & again to annoy me. But its your problem rather than mine. I will keep posting my opinions here but I won't justify to members like you.

    Not to annoy you; I asked because I don't understand what you claim are your reasons. You say it's nothing to do with race or gender, but then you complain it's being done to appease 'SJW's, presumably because of her race and/or gender. It doesn't make sense. You won't justify because you can't.

    I think you did understand you are just trying to pretend that you don't and keep asking me the same question again & again just to annoy me.

    Read it once again,
    I have no issue if she is 007. I said it's an stupid idea. If they cast Henry Cavill as 007 instead of her I will stand by my statement "it's an stupid idea" it has nothing to do with race/gender. Hope it's clear now and if it isn't then sayonara.
  • mtmmtm
    edited July 15 Posts: 203
    mtm wrote: »
    Some of them say that, yes; some of them are clearly offended because of her gender and background. I don't understand either point of view: I can't imagine anything less important than which codename Bond is operating under when you're watching a thrilling action scene.
    I mean, it's a 60 year old franchise in which he has been interchangeable with the number 007. I get the resistance in a way. Again the question I post is this: if she gets the number taken away from her, is that really a great look for her character?

    Fans like the things they're fans of to stay the same because that's what they became fans of: I can understand that. But this is clearly just a temporary change- it's like complaining that he didn't wear a tuxedo in Live and Let and Die. It's trivial.
    As to her losing the number, well I'm trying to think of any character who comes out of the Bond movies looking better than Bond himself- it doesn't really happen. For another character to be proven not-quite-as-good-as-Bond is no big shock, is it? If she gets it taken away it'll likely be because she's betrayed the service or she's dead, not because she's a woman and can't run in heels! :)
    If she keeps the number for good, will the fanbase move on with it?

    She just... won't. They'll play with their toys as they always do: you've got to mix things around. But they're not going to remove the 007 from James Bond long term.
  • Posts: 1,020
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    For many it has nothing to do with race or gender. What if it was another white male instead of a black woman? Would you be fine with the criticism then?

    Same, either it's black/white or any race/ gender I am not okay with it. But I still think that it's just tabloid bs hardly any truth behind it.
    The main issue is the producers of the Bond franchise throwing a bone to online Social Justice press many of whom don't really care about the franchise, but who have been campaigning for years for Bond to be portrayed by someone of another race or gender.

    So the problem is her race/gender? I'm getting confused here! :)

    Maybe we need a separate thread for the bigots? :D

    The problem here is (if the rumors are true) they are bending to the SJW's agenda just to get more audience to attract to Cinema. Her race/gender has nothing to do with it.

    Even if there would have been a female 007 at lead for bond26 I would be okay with it even respect that , I won't like or watch it but I won't bash it either because she would be building herself from the ground brick by brick just like Daniel or any other bond's did they didn't just use bond's name to attract the audience.

    We may need a separate thread for ignorants as well?

    100% agreed on the first bolded sentence but the second is slightly incorrect, for she is being used BECAUSE of her race and gender. Poor girl. It's not her fault at all and I don't blame her for taking the role. Who wouldn't? But the powers-that-be are using her as a political tool and it's wrong.
  • Posts: 2,415
    To clarify with some sanity.
    (...)
    Phoebe-Waller Bridge is NOT a 'feminist' writer.
    But:
    "James Bond will be turned into a ‘#metoo feminist icon’ thanks to feisty Bond girls and Fleabag writer Phoebe Waller-Bridge. 007 is set to get dragged into the 21st Century with a feminist makeover"
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/8942445/james-bond-feminist-icon-fleabag-phoebe-waller-bridge/

    I would say that we are way past just a "gimmick" here.
  • Posts: 444
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Also if the decision to give the codename 007 to a black female woman, whose to say it's more complex than just political influence. The movie industry is about providing entertainment for any audience. Making decisions about your movie to influence the outcome of the success isn't a bad thing. That's moviemaking. You make something you believe in and something you feel people will resonate with and hope people enjoy it.

    For example, it's known that having good representation and having your main characters be of a realistic and multicultural ethnicity works well for cinema. Despite everything Captain Marvel did great at the box-office, making just over what Skyfall made and Black Panther making even more than that. So why wouldn't the producers and writers over at EON think...

    "Hold on, our franchise is having trouble resonating with modern audiences How can we do this?"

    Oh it's obvious. We have more representation for our main characters, not just physically but actually doing more with the characters and changing up the dynamic.
    And I'm all for that, I'm actually fine with racebending Bond even though most people here would disagree with me, and I won't delve further into that topic.

    However, I think creating this dynamic with Bond is also fine line that could backfire on them, especially if they make Nomi look any lesser. If it's a great move for women, why can't she keep the number? And also, if she's special, why is she a one and done Bond girl (assuming she's not returning if/when the franchise is rebooted after Craig)? Those are the questions I hope they are able to handle well.
  • mtmmtm
    Posts: 203
    But this is all assuming you are honest when you say “it’s nothing to do with gender or race”, but when race and gender are continually used in your arguments then it’s hard to believe it’s not a problem for you.

    Thank you, yes; you've said that far more eloquently than I did! :)
  • Posts: 2,415
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    Code-name is temporarily transferred to another agent. Most fans wouldn't think much of it. But somehow since that agent is black and a woman, that has people angry. Just racist and sexist people.

    So, only black women are allowed to doubt or criticize the decision?

    So the issue isn't that Bond is no longer 007, that's absolutely fine? The problem is that his desk gets taken by someone else
    Correct. 007 is someone else than James Bond. That is my issue. White male, black woman, frenchspeaking asian midget - doesn't matter - it is someone else.

    Are you okay with Batman or Spider-Man being anyone else other than Bruce Wayne or Peter Parker?

    No, I am not okay with that. I am not a fan of toying with the identity of well established characters.

    M, Moneypenny, Felix. All "toyed" with and all successful.
    But these are secondary characters. Big difference.
  • mtmmtm
    Posts: 203
    Zekidk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Are you okay with Batman or Spider-Man being anyone else other than Bruce Wayne or Peter Parker?

    No, I am not okay with that. I am not a fan of toying with the identity of well established characters.

    You know it's happened loads of times, though?

    Spider Man Into the Spider Verse: big hit.



  • ResurrectionResurrection You don't need to be an operative to see the obvious
    Posts: 1,018
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    For many it has nothing to do with race or gender. What if it was another white male instead of a black woman? Would you be fine with the criticism then?

    Same, either it's black/white or any race/ gender I am not okay with it. But I still think that it's just tabloid bs hardly any truth behind it.
    The main issue is the producers of the Bond franchise throwing a bone to online Social Justice press many of whom don't really care about the franchise, but who have been campaigning for years for Bond to be portrayed by someone of another race or gender.

    So the problem is her race/gender? I'm getting confused here! :)

    Maybe we need a separate thread for the bigots? :D

    The problem here is (if the rumors are true) they are bending to the SJW's agenda just to get more audience to attract to Cinema. Her race/gender has nothing to do with it.

    Even if there would have been a female 007 at lead for bond26 I would be okay with it even respect that , I won't like or watch it but I won't bash it either because she would be building herself from the ground brick by brick just like Daniel or any other bond's did they didn't just use bond's name to attract the audience.

    We may need a separate thread for ignorants as well?

    100% agreed on the first bolded sentence but the second is slightly incorrect, for she is being used BECAUSE of her race and gender. Poor girl. It's not her fault at all and I don't blame her for taking the role. Who wouldn't? But the powers-that-be are using her as a political tool and it's wrong.

    Oh no no what I meant when I said it has nothing to do about her race/gender is:

    She is a terrific actress and I would have loved to see her as 00 agent just not 007. I am not discriminating her because she is black or a woman but because of the idea and the one's behind that idea. For me James bond is 007 and 007 is James bond.
  • Posts: 2,415
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Are you okay with Batman or Spider-Man being anyone else other than Bruce Wayne or Peter Parker?

    No, I am not okay with that. I am not a fan of toying with the identity of well established characters.

    You know it's happened loads of times, though?

    Spider Man Into the Spider Verse: big hit.
    Ah.. a reference to a cartoon? Please do better.
  • Posts: 444
    mtm wrote: »
    As to her losing the number, well I'm trying to think of any character who comes out of the Bond movies looking better than Bond himself- it doesn't really happen. For another character to be proven not-quite-as-good-as-Bond is no big shock, is it? If she gets it taken away it'll likely be because she's betrayed the service or she's dead, not because she's a woman and can't run in heels! :)
    But we're talking about more people -- especially skeptics of the franchise -- being allured because of this recent development, and that's why I'm saying they won't really bite, if she's portrayed in a worse look, professionally, than Bond. I mean look at Jinx in Die Another Day: she needed to be saved over and over again. It wasn't really as progressive as they wanted it to be. That's the fine line I'm talking about. As I've said, I wish them the best.

  • Posts: 1,020
    Look, here’s the thing. If it’s not about race or gender then it’s simply that people don’t like the re-attribution of Bond’s number. If that’s the case, realise that Fleming stripped bond of his 00 number and gave him a new designation for an entire novel. That’s the guy that created him. Then Horowitz made it so 007 took on the number from a previous agent in Forever and a Day. There have been several different 00 agents with the same number in the films, games, and novels. So, there’s precedent already.

    But let’s not forget the main thing here: Danjaq own the cinematic Bond and they decide what to do with that character, not you. What makes you naysayers think you know better than a business that’s been successfully running the franchise for over half a century? When you stamp your feet about something like this you just come off as childish because you’re not getting your way. Because it’s not going the way you think it should. You’re fans, experts even. But do you know what’s best for Bond? What qualifies you to say what should be done above those who have made it their lives work? At the end of the day, it’s your opinion and you’re welcome to express it, but it doesn’t make it right or factual.

    But this is all assuming you are honest when you say “it’s nothing to do with gender or race”, but when race and gender are continually used in your arguments then it’s hard to believe it’s not a problem for you.

    But again, they are NOT doing it for good reasons like to serve the story or make the film better. It's ONLY to pander to the SJW crowd. If you don't believe that you are in deep denial.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 1,528
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Also if the decision to give the codename 007 to a black female woman, whose to say it's more complex than just political influence. The movie industry is about providing entertainment for any audience. Making decisions about your movie to influence the outcome of the success isn't a bad thing. That's moviemaking. You make something you believe in and something you feel people will resonate with and hope people enjoy it.

    For example, it's known that having good representation and having your main characters be of a realistic and multicultural ethnicity works well for cinema. Despite everything Captain Marvel did great at the box-office, making just over what Skyfall made and Black Panther making even more than that. So why wouldn't the producers and writers over at EON think...

    "Hold on, our franchise is having trouble resonating with modern audiences How can we do this?"

    Oh it's obvious. We have more representation for our main characters, not just physically but actually doing more with the characters and changing up the dynamic.
    And I'm all for that, I'm actually fine with racebending Bond even though most people here would disagree with me, and I won't delve further into that topic.

    However, I think creating this dynamic with Bond is also fine line that could backfire on them, especially if they make Nomi look any lesser. If it's a great move for women, why can't she keep the number? And also, if she's special, why is she a one and done Bond girl (assuming she's not returning if/when the franchise is rebooted after Craig)? Those are the questions I hope they are able to handle well.

    Well @FrankXavier, nothing's actually set in stone and just really rumours, so she may keep the number? It depends what they do with Bond. Just because James Bond is helping with the mission, doesn't mean she'll get demoted. I think she'll be a one-and-done Bond girl more because of the next Bond being a complete reset. If not she could return but I don't know if they will. She's still a Bond girl, and its very rare they stick around.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Crab Key
    Posts: 460
    Denbigh wrote: »
    For god's sake, a man replaced our female M for more films and no-one complained.

    Oh, plenty have, they’re just a vocal minority. There’s definitely a subset of old fans that don’t want the world around James Bond to change.
  • ResurrectionResurrection You don't need to be an operative to see the obvious
    Posts: 1,018
    Denbigh wrote: »
    For god's sake, a man replaced our female M for more films and no-one complained.

    Oh, plenty have, they’re just a vocal minority. There’s definitely a subset of old fans that don’t want the world around James Bond to change.

    My father is 69 now he only liked Bernard & Judi's M , he don't even remember the rest.
  • ResurrectionResurrection You don't need to be an operative to see the obvious
    edited July 15 Posts: 1,018
    Denbigh wrote: »
    For god's sake, a man replaced our female M for more films and no-one complained.

    Oh, plenty have, they’re just a vocal minority. There’s definitely a subset of old fans that don’t want the world around James Bond to change.

    My father is 69 now and he only liked Bernard & Judi's M , he don't even remember the rest. "Old fan"s I don't think so. I think they are more concerned about the quality then gender.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Crab Key
    Posts: 460
    Denbigh wrote: »
    For god's sake, a man replaced our female M for more films and no-one complained.

    Oh, plenty have, they’re just a vocal minority. There’s definitely a subset of old fans that don’t want the world around James Bond to change.

    My father is 69 now and he only liked Bernard & Judi's M , he don't even remember the rest. "Old fan"s I don't think so. I think they are more concerned about the quality then gender.

    I said subset
  • mtmmtm
    Posts: 203
    Zekidk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Zekidk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Are you okay with Batman or Spider-Man being anyone else other than Bruce Wayne or Peter Parker?

    No, I am not okay with that. I am not a fan of toying with the identity of well established characters.

    You know it's happened loads of times, though?

    Spider Man Into the Spider Verse: big hit.
    Ah.. a reference to a cartoon? Please do better.

    Oh is this another 'b-b-b-bit that's different!" "Why?" "Because it is!" :D I think you really need to do better than that.
    How about the end of Dark Knight Rises? Any scene from the 60s Batman series where Alfred took over from Bruce because he was away?

    Or have a look at the original comics -the form the fans of Batman and Spider-Man actually like best- and work out that many different characters have become Spidey and Bats over the years. I don't have to do better than that.
  • mtmmtm
    Posts: 203
    mtm wrote: »
    As to her losing the number, well I'm trying to think of any character who comes out of the Bond movies looking better than Bond himself- it doesn't really happen. For another character to be proven not-quite-as-good-as-Bond is no big shock, is it? If she gets it taken away it'll likely be because she's betrayed the service or she's dead, not because she's a woman and can't run in heels! :)
    But we're talking about more people -- especially skeptics of the franchise -- being allured because of this recent development, and that's why I'm saying they won't really bite, if she's portrayed in a worse look, professionally, than Bond. I mean look at Jinx in Die Another Day: she needed to be saved over and over again. It wasn't really as progressive as they wanted it to be. That's the fine line I'm talking about. As I've said, I wish them the best.

    Well these folks are all vaguely intelligent: they know in a James Bond film that James Bond comes out on top in the end. I don't think she's going to made to look a fool.
  • mtmmtm
    Posts: 203
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Look, here’s the thing. If it’s not about race or gender then it’s simply that people don’t like the re-attribution of Bond’s number. If that’s the case, realise that Fleming stripped bond of his 00 number and gave him a new designation for an entire novel. That’s the guy that created him. Then Horowitz made it so 007 took on the number from a previous agent in Forever and a Day. There have been several different 00 agents with the same number in the films, games, and novels. So, there’s precedent already.

    But let’s not forget the main thing here: Danjaq own the cinematic Bond and they decide what to do with that character, not you. What makes you naysayers think you know better than a business that’s been successfully running the franchise for over half a century? When you stamp your feet about something like this you just come off as childish because you’re not getting your way. Because it’s not going the way you think it should. You’re fans, experts even. But do you know what’s best for Bond? What qualifies you to say what should be done above those who have made it their lives work? At the end of the day, it’s your opinion and you’re welcome to express it, but it doesn’t make it right or factual.

    But this is all assuming you are honest when you say “it’s nothing to do with gender or race”, but when race and gender are continually used in your arguments then it’s hard to believe it’s not a problem for you.

    But again, they are NOT doing it for good reasons like to serve the story or make the film better. It's ONLY to pander to the SJW crowd. If you don't believe that you are in deep denial.

    These are not healthy minds we're dealing with here.
  • mtmmtm
    Posts: 203
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Also if the decision to give the codename 007 to a black female woman, whose to say it's more complex than just political influence. The movie industry is about providing entertainment for any audience. Making decisions about your movie to influence the outcome of the success isn't a bad thing. That's moviemaking. You make something you believe in and something you feel people will resonate with and hope people enjoy it.

    For example, it's known that having good representation and having your main characters be of a realistic and multicultural ethnicity works well for cinema. Despite everything Captain Marvel did great at the box-office, making just over what Skyfall made and Black Panther making even more than that. So why wouldn't the producers and writers over at EON think...

    "Hold on, our franchise is having trouble resonating with modern audiences How can we do this?"

    Oh it's obvious. We have more representation for our main characters, not just physically but actually doing more with the characters and changing up the dynamic.
    And I'm all for that, I'm actually fine with racebending Bond even though most people here would disagree with me, and I won't delve further into that topic.

    However, I think creating this dynamic with Bond is also fine line that could backfire on them, especially if they make Nomi look any lesser. If it's a great move for women, why can't she keep the number? And also, if she's special, why is she a one and done Bond girl (assuming she's not returning if/when the franchise is rebooted after Craig)? Those are the questions I hope they are able to handle well.

    Well @FrankXavier, nothing's actually set in stone and just really rumours, so she may keep the number? It depends what they do with Bond. Just because James Bond is helping with the mission, doesn't mean she'll get demoted. I think she'll be a one-and-done Bond girl more because of the next Bond being a complete reset. If not she could return but I don't know if they will. She's still a Bond girl, and its very rare they stick around.

    Indeed, yes. Looking at Dark Knight Rises (and apologies if you haven't seen it!) that film ends with Bruce Wayne giving up being Batman and another character taking on the mantle. And yet, the character isn't done with: the film series got rebooted and, guess what? Bruce is Bats again :)
    So it could well end with Nomi being 007 and Bond going off into the sunset, but if the series gets another reboot it'll be starring James Bond 007 once again.
  • Posts: 503
    @mtm It wouldn't be the first plotline Bond stole from another movie. Brofeld was lifted directly from Austin Powers.
  • mtmmtm
    Posts: 203
    @mtm It wouldn't be the first plotline Bond stole from another movie. Brofeld was lifted directly from Austin Powers.

    Ha! I didn't notice that before :D
  • Posts: 3,030
    The_Reaper wrote: »
    Look, here’s the thing. If it’s not about race or gender then it’s simply that people don’t like the re-attribution of Bond’s number. If that’s the case, realise that Fleming stripped bond of his 00 number and gave him a new designation for an entire novel. That’s the guy that created him. Then Horowitz made it so 007 took on the number from a previous agent in Forever and a Day. There have been several different 00 agents with the same number in the films, games, and novels. So, there’s precedent already.

    But let’s not forget the main thing here: Danjaq own the cinematic Bond and they decide what to do with that character, not you. What makes you naysayers think you know better than a business that’s been successfully running the franchise for over half a century? When you stamp your feet about something like this you just come off as childish because you’re not getting your way. Because it’s not going the way you think it should. You’re fans, experts even. But do you know what’s best for Bond? What qualifies you to say what should be done above those who have made it their lives work? At the end of the day, it’s your opinion and you’re welcome to express it, but it doesn’t make it right or factual.

    But this is all assuming you are honest when you say “it’s nothing to do with gender or race”, but when race and gender are continually used in your arguments then it’s hard to believe it’s not a problem for you.

    But again, they are NOT doing it for good reasons like to serve the story or make the film better. It's ONLY to pander to the SJW crowd. If you don't believe that you are in deep denial.

    I don't know about anyone else, but when terms such as 'SJW' start getting thrown around it just makes the discussion reductive and childish. It's the sort of term I expect to see on comic book forums where the audience are, well, mostly a lot younger than the people here I assume.

    I'm all for a discussion on the female 007 point, but guys, let's be mature and not use schoolyard taunts. I'm sure we are all better than that. Plus, once the term starts getting used, the natural response is for people to disregard any opinion you espouse as belong to a "man baby". Which I'm certain isn't the case.

    If you want to discuss the matter properly, let's do it. Currently, I haven't seen one persuasive argument why a female 007 is a bad idea.

    If anything, I was hesitant on Lynch's casting, but now I'm all in....

    RTX6O1VA_bukwcm

    Can we get some Nomi fan art?
Sign In or Register to comment.