No Time to Die production thread

11441451471491501208

Comments

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    If anyone doubts PWB's ability to pull this twist off, I suggest they watch Fleabag.

    Her writing is anything but PC.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    echo wrote: »
    If anyone doubts PWB's ability to pull this twist off, I suggest they watch Fleabag.

    Her writing is anything but PC.

    And her comments concerning Bond being true to his character show that she is not driven by PC ideology.

  • edited July 2019 Posts: 4,400
    RC7 wrote: »
    I understand the logic of 007 being assigned to another agent, but I’m personally not for it. For me the two are inextricably linked - one and the same. I’ll roll with it as a one film gimmick, but pursuing the idea beyond that is franchise killing. Thankfully EON are smart enough to know that.
    Personally, I love the idea.

    When James Bond became '007' in CR, it really affected him mentally. Remember that look after he killed Fisher? When he tended to his wounds after killing Obanno? When he sat with Vesper in the shower? When he could hardly stare at Solange's body?

    He had his armour up and wouldn't let anyone see past the cold-heartened assassin. The only person who saw past it was Vesper.

    If Nomi has just become '007' then Bond knows that beneath her bravado there is a broken person struggling with her decisions.

    This goes full circle and I absolutely love it.

    Everything you say is true, but her inheriting the 007 moniker is irrelevant regard what you say - that’s the gimmick.
    RC7 wrote: »
    I understand the logic of 007 being assigned to another agent, but I’m personally not for it. For me the two are inextricably linked - one and the same. I’ll roll with it as a one film gimmick, but pursuing the idea beyond that is franchise killing. Thankfully EON are smart enough to know that.
    Personally, I love the idea.

    When James Bond became '007' in CR, it really affected him mentally. Remember that look after he killed Fisher? When he tended to his wounds after killing Obanno? When he sat with Vesper in the shower? When he could hardly stare at Solange's body?

    He had his armour up and wouldn't let anyone see past the cold-heartened assassin. The only person who saw past it was Vesper.

    If Nomi has just become '007' then Bond knows that beneath her bravado there is a broken person struggling with her decisions.

    This goes full circle and I absolutely love it.

    Everything you say is true, but her inheriting the 007 moniker is irrelevant regard what you say - that’s the gimmick.

    Indeed. There's plenty of validity in what @Pierce2Daniel is saying thematically, but it certainly is a gimmick and I also don't know if they'll really spend all that much time developing such a character driven strand that isn't Bond-centric in Craig's final film. Especially considering the already sizeable number of elements already in play.

    She has a shared experience with Bond. Imagine a scene where she talks about her first two kills. Perhaps Bond even opens up. Considering the fact that Nomi is also '007' I can imagine she would be the first person in his entire life who he could imagine speaking too.....essentially she is another version of himself.

    They have a shared kinship.

    Plus, there are naturally comic elements as Bond and Nomi would have friction as a result of the '007' handover.

    So you have drama and comedy. I can't think of a more perfect dynamic.

    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    There's a certain degree of indirect discrimination that prohibits people associating the '007' number with anything aside the white male hegemony. Any attempt to decry it as a 'gimmick' undermines the importance the move is to certain people.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 3,160
    After all the "can we just have a straight forward Bond movie where he is send on a mission"-comments after the last two, this is what it comes down to: toying even more with the identity of the character, because they want a "gimmick"? Have gadgets become too old fashion? Too "male"? Why not a midget or an othodox jew, instead of a black woman? 007 is not just a number. It has always been directly linked to James Bond.
  • RC7 wrote: »
    I understand the logic of 007 being assigned to another agent, but I’m personally not for it. For me the two are inextricably linked - one and the same. I’ll roll with it as a one film gimmick, but pursuing the idea beyond that is franchise killing. Thankfully EON are smart enough to know that.
    Agreed. I also think the Bond films don't need gimmicks, especially like this.





  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited July 2019 Posts: 8,009
    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    There's a certain degree of indirect discrimination that prohibits people associating the '007' number with anything aside the white male hegemony. Any attempt to decry it as a 'gimmick' undermines the importance the move is to certain people.

    I'm not against the Nomi as 007 idea as I'm sure I've made clear previously, but I think this is extremely presumptious and unfair on those who simply just like these trademark aspects of the Bond films as part of being escapist fantasy and enjoy them without any consideration for such social viewpoints.

    It is also possible for something to be a gimmick (and unless it's key to the plot - which it probably isn't - it is a gimmick) and important to certain people at the same time. It doesn't necessarily undermine anything.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 6,665
    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    Are you for real?!?

    What the f'n is "white masculinity and strength"?

    And a strong white male (are you talking about gorillas here? I can't tell), would feel emasculated by the young black woman?

    Are you for real?!?

    If this is the train for the brave new world, where people have "opinions" like this, and their analytical ability is restrained by this politically correct esotropia, I'm bloody out. I know you find it a fad to trend on twitter and be pro the empowerment of minorities just for the sake of it, but this is ridiculous. And, to be fair, racist as hell. A strong white male, emasculated?!? Are we in the National Geographic Channel here? What a load of b*ll.

    We're talking about characters written by authors, described in full, head to toe. And if you're talking about emasculating white heterosexual males (to use your bio-something discourse), what better way to destitute all their identificatory fictional characters and make them ashamed of their colour of skin. Isn't that racism? Social justice, you say? No, sir, it's racism. It's bigotry. It's feminism the way misogyny is masculinity. It's wrong.

    All of this said, 007 is just a bloody number assigned to an agent. And they're using it as a gimmick to have fun with the characters, as you've said.

    People here don't like that because it is a gimmick, and frankly, we just want a well written James Bond 007 film that doesn't feel ashamed of what it is. This one may very well be it. Who knows at this point?

    Strong white male and white masculinity...please... Only skinheads and right wing conservatives consider those a thing. Saying some of us feel emasculated by these news is overstepping your mark sir.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    Yes the drumbeat of racism, sexism and toxic , primarily white, masculinity , from the more socially aware and enlightened, continues.
    It’s such condescending tripe
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    Univex wrote: »
    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    Are you for real?!?

    What the f'n is "white masculinity and strength"?

    And a strong white male (are you talking about gorillas here? I can't tell), would feel emasculated by the young black woman?

    Are you for real?!?

    If this is the train for the brave new world, where people have "opinions" like this, and their analytical ability is restrained by this politically correct esotropia, I'm bloody out. I know you find it a fad to trend on twitter and be pro the empowerment of minorities just for the sake of it, but this is ridiculous. And, to be fair, racist as hell. A strong white male, emasculated?!? Are we in the National Geographic Channel here? What a load of b*ll.

    Wow. That just...proved the point.

    I think it's an interesting twist for B25, if accurate.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited July 2019 Posts: 2,541
    boldfinger wrote: »
    w2bond wrote: »
    If they go with the 007 branding then they can cast anyone as 007. Including a black actor or a female or....both to be extra PC. Hmm the casting at the moment is interesting...will she be the new 007...for Bond 26???

    Isn't it empowering for people of all ethnicities and races to see a strong black female lead? The only thing this disrupts is the status quo.......
    A strong black female lead is one Thing. However the number 007 is inevitably associated with certain male characteristics. Giving this number to a female Agent is About as empowering as forcing female Managers to act as if they were males and ignore their female strengths.
    What would be so wrong with letting the strong black female lead have her own character, instead of Pressing her into a man´s role?

    I missed your comments sir =D>
    While we are on this subject try changing female characters to male one's for the sake of gimmicks and then see the reaction, good luck with that.
    Over and out
  • Posts: 4,400
    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    There's a certain degree of indirect discrimination that prohibits people associating the '007' number with anything aside the white male hegemony. Any attempt to decry it as a 'gimmick' undermines the importance the move is to certain people.

    I'm not against the Nomi as 007 idea as I'm sure I've made clear previously, but I think this is extremely presumptious and unfair on those who simply just like these trademark aspects of the Bond films as part of being escapist fantasy and enjoy them without any consideration for such social viewpoints.

    It is also possible for something to be a gimmick (unless it's key to the plot, which it probably isn't) and important to certain people at the same time. It doesn't necessarily undermine anything.

    There are obvious social implications as this is 2019 and everything is political. But that only occurs if we push a post-modern filter on this news and analyse some kind of political motivation behind the casting.

    There is a very very good chance that Lashana Lynch was the best person for the part and that she just happens to be a black woman.

    In this respect, there is nothing stopping you enjoying the film as a piece of entertainment. Remember, none of us know how it will be handled. We are merely reacting off the idea off our own built-in value system.
    Univex wrote: »
    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    Are you for real?!?

    What the f'n is "white masculinity and strength"?

    And a strong white male (are you talking about gorillas here? I can't tell), would feel emasculated by the young black woman?

    Are you for real?!?

    If this is the train for the brave new world, where people have "opinions" like this, and their analytical ability is restrained by this politically correct esotropia, I'm bloody out. I know you find it a fad to trend on twitter and be pro the empowerment of minorities just for the sake of it, but this is ridiculous. And, to be fair, racist as hell. A strong white male, emasculated?!? Are we in the National Geographic Channel here? What a load of b*ll.

    Personally, I'm just trying to rationalise why people may feel this way.
  • 007_Austria007_Austria Austria
    Posts: 13

    Mr. Cool
  • Posts: 385
    I’m so glad that Babs has made it easy for me to save the price of a ticket. They can ride this gimmick all the way into receivership for all I care.
  • PavloPavlo Ukraine
    Posts: 323
    Maybe PTS scene is about how Nomi gets 007, his key operation that makes her 00
  • Posts: 22
    I agree with @Pierce2Daniel and actually, I think we really have to wait and see how they handle it in the film. In the aftermath of the #MeToo movement (which I reckon was a long time coming,) there was all sorts of talk of there being a female James Bond which, rightly so was chastised by the community- not in a misogynistic way, but purely because as someone earlier said James Bond was created by Ian Fleming as a male character. We can't suddenly say we are disconcerted because the franchise has created a new, strong character who is both black and a woman. It's exactly as Craig said, these characters need to be available across the board as opposed to 'shoe-horning' diversive casting onto an existing character. (I have to say I think the M:I franchise did this really well with Ilsa Faust. We got a badass new character while not detracting from the Cruise juggernaut.)
    I think we have a really smart set of writers (I'm not a P&W fan, but I think PWB, CJF and SZB are all heavyweights) and from PWB's interviews I just can't see her allowing this to be solely a 'gimmick.'
    I think (or maybe HOPE) that the information we are piecing together isn't quite as straightforward as we think, purely on the basis that SP was ruined by leaks (not to mention a trailer which pretty much spoiled the major plot twist!) I really think we will be in for a few surprises, otherwise I think the film will be a disappointment if it follows the course some of these leaks seem to suggest: but hey, it's a lot more fun staying positive and presuming the best. We were going nuts a few months ago when we were adamant the film was called 'Shatterhand' (I didn't mind it too much) and look how wrong we were!
    I was a teenager when it was announced Craig was the new Bond and I'm ashamed to say when I found out Brosnan was over I thought the world had ended: purely because Craig didn't fit the image I'd made in my head of what Bond should be. I was thankfully extremely wrong and pleasantly surprised that DC gave the franchise new life for me, I really think we will be in for a treat for B25.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 6,665
    talos7 wrote: »
    Yes the drumbeat of racism, sexism and toxic , primarily white, masculinity , from the more socially aware and enlightened, continues.
    It’s such condescending tripe

    It really, really is.

    Mr. Cool

    Craig looks good there. When was this taken?
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,882
    boldfinger wrote: »
    I only want Vesper to appear in a dream sequence, if Jack Wade will randomly pop up to deliver a cheeky "She's dead, Jimbo" line. Either that or, "For gods sake, Jimbo, i'm a retired CIA agent, not an medium". Either one will do.
    Aah very good ones, @MajorDSmythe! I´m on board with any of them. It´s a crime Jack Wade didn´t appear in every Bond film since GE. I would have loved to learn more About Jack´s gardening.

    I like where this is going. Bond and Wade can share their respective knowledge of Hoes.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    I understand the logic of 007 being assigned to another agent, but I’m personally not for it. For me the two are inextricably linked - one and the same. I’ll roll with it as a one film gimmick, but pursuing the idea beyond that is franchise killing. Thankfully EON are smart enough to know that.
    Personally, I love the idea.

    When James Bond became '007' in CR, it really affected him mentally. Remember that look after he killed Fisher? When he tended to his wounds after killing Obanno? When he sat with Vesper in the shower? When he could hardly stare at Solange's body?

    He had his armour up and wouldn't let anyone see past the cold-heartened assassin. The only person who saw past it was Vesper.

    If Nomi has just become '007' then Bond knows that beneath her bravado there is a broken person struggling with her decisions.

    This goes full circle and I absolutely love it.

    Everything you say is true, but her inheriting the 007 moniker is irrelevant regard what you say - that’s the gimmick.
    RC7 wrote: »
    I understand the logic of 007 being assigned to another agent, but I’m personally not for it. For me the two are inextricably linked - one and the same. I’ll roll with it as a one film gimmick, but pursuing the idea beyond that is franchise killing. Thankfully EON are smart enough to know that.
    Personally, I love the idea.

    When James Bond became '007' in CR, it really affected him mentally. Remember that look after he killed Fisher? When he tended to his wounds after killing Obanno? When he sat with Vesper in the shower? When he could hardly stare at Solange's body?

    He had his armour up and wouldn't let anyone see past the cold-heartened assassin. The only person who saw past it was Vesper.

    If Nomi has just become '007' then Bond knows that beneath her bravado there is a broken person struggling with her decisions.

    This goes full circle and I absolutely love it.

    Everything you say is true, but her inheriting the 007 moniker is irrelevant regard what you say - that’s the gimmick.

    Indeed. There's plenty of validity in what @Pierce2Daniel is saying thematically, but it certainly is a gimmick and I also don't know if they'll really spend all that much time developing such a character driven strand that isn't Bond-centric in Craig's final film. Especially considering the already sizeable number of elements already in play.

    She has a shared experience with Bond. Imagine a scene where she talks about her first two kills. Perhaps Bond even opens up. Considering the fact that Nomi is also '007' I can imagine she would be the first person in his entire life who he could imagine speaking too.....essentially she is another version of himself.

    They have a shared kinship.

    Plus, there are naturally comic elements as Bond and Nomi would have friction as a result of the '007' handover.

    So you have drama and comedy. I can't think of a more perfect dynamic.

    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    There's a certain degree of indirect discrimination that prohibits people associating the '007' number with anything aside the white male hegemony. Any attempt to decry it as a 'gimmick' undermines the importance the move is to certain people.

    I think you’re overthinking things, there. I wouldn’t want two white male 007’s in the same film either. The idea that white males in general shudder at the notion of women or minorities holding power is the biggest myth on the planet. It’s simply not true outside a tiny minority of idiots, but pushed as if it’s the norm.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited July 2019 Posts: 8,009
    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    There's a certain degree of indirect discrimination that prohibits people associating the '007' number with anything aside the white male hegemony. Any attempt to decry it as a 'gimmick' undermines the importance the move is to certain people.

    I'm not against the Nomi as 007 idea as I'm sure I've made clear previously, but I think this is extremely presumptious and unfair on those who simply just like these trademark aspects of the Bond films as part of being escapist fantasy and enjoy them without any consideration for such social viewpoints.

    It is also possible for something to be a gimmick (unless it's key to the plot, which it probably isn't) and important to certain people at the same time. It doesn't necessarily undermine anything.

    There are obvious social implications as this is 2019 and everything is political. But that only occurs if we push a post-modern filter on this news and analyse some kind of political motivation behind the casting.

    There is a very very good chance that Lashana Lynch was the best person for the part and that she just happens to be a black woman.

    In this respect, there is nothing stopping you enjoying the film as a piece of entertainment. Remember, none of us know how it will be handled. We are merely reacting off the idea off our own built-in value system.

    Which is all very well and good, and I'm sure Lynch was the best person for the part and will do a great job. But unless they auditioned both genders from all races for the part (which they didn't), her being a black woman is besides the point - unless it's actually relevant to the story.

    If Nomi was being played by a white actress, it would still be a gimmick. If it were a black male, it would still be a gimmick. If it were a white male, it would still be a gimmick. And it's the gimmick that people rightly/wrongly have an issue with. I'm personally fine with it and think it'll add something different to the film.

    However, this is the problem with putting a political/social filter on these types of developments.....sometimes you end up looking at things that aren't there.

    Which is why your statements regarding people's reluctance to let go of a symbol of "white masculinity and strength" might not be the wisest.
  • Posts: 385
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    I understand the logic of 007 being assigned to another agent, but I’m personally not for it. For me the two are inextricably linked - one and the same. I’ll roll with it as a one film gimmick, but pursuing the idea beyond that is franchise killing. Thankfully EON are smart enough to know that.
    Personally, I love the idea.

    When James Bond became '007' in CR, it really affected him mentally. Remember that look after he killed Fisher? When he tended to his wounds after killing Obanno? When he sat with Vesper in the shower? When he could hardly stare at Solange's body?

    He had his armour up and wouldn't let anyone see past the cold-heartened assassin. The only person who saw past it was Vesper.

    If Nomi has just become '007' then Bond knows that beneath her bravado there is a broken person struggling with her decisions.

    This goes full circle and I absolutely love it.

    Everything you say is true, but her inheriting the 007 moniker is irrelevant regard what you say - that’s the gimmick.
    RC7 wrote: »
    I understand the logic of 007 being assigned to another agent, but I’m personally not for it. For me the two are inextricably linked - one and the same. I’ll roll with it as a one film gimmick, but pursuing the idea beyond that is franchise killing. Thankfully EON are smart enough to know that.
    Personally, I love the idea.

    When James Bond became '007' in CR, it really affected him mentally. Remember that look after he killed Fisher? When he tended to his wounds after killing Obanno? When he sat with Vesper in the shower? When he could hardly stare at Solange's body?

    He had his armour up and wouldn't let anyone see past the cold-heartened assassin. The only person who saw past it was Vesper.

    If Nomi has just become '007' then Bond knows that beneath her bravado there is a broken person struggling with her decisions.

    This goes full circle and I absolutely love it.

    Everything you say is true, but her inheriting the 007 moniker is irrelevant regard what you say - that’s the gimmick.

    Indeed. There's plenty of validity in what @Pierce2Daniel is saying thematically, but it certainly is a gimmick and I also don't know if they'll really spend all that much time developing such a character driven strand that isn't Bond-centric in Craig's final film. Especially considering the already sizeable number of elements already in play.

    She has a shared experience with Bond. Imagine a scene where she talks about her first two kills. Perhaps Bond even opens up. Considering the fact that Nomi is also '007' I can imagine she would be the first person in his entire life who he could imagine speaking too.....essentially she is another version of himself.

    They have a shared kinship.

    Plus, there are naturally comic elements as Bond and Nomi would have friction as a result of the '007' handover.

    So you have drama and comedy. I can't think of a more perfect dynamic.

    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    There's a certain degree of indirect discrimination that prohibits people associating the '007' number with anything aside the white male hegemony. Any attempt to decry it as a 'gimmick' undermines the importance the move is to certain people.

    I think you’re overthinking things, there. I wouldn’t want two white male 007’s in the same film either. The idea that white males in general shudder at the notion of women or minorities holding power is the biggest myth on the planet. It’s simply not true outside a tiny minority of idiots, but pushed as if it’s the norm.

    It’s pushed because it’s the easiest way to dismiss any complaints and silence the complainers. Someone doesn’t like something we did a bad job on? Well, they’re just [BadThing]. Disney pulled it after The Last Jedi, and people will push it in this case if this turns out to be true.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 22
    On a different tangent, and I'm sure this doesn't need a spoiler tag because there's absolutely no truth in it whatsoever, but I had a wild hope the other day that perhaps Bond/Malek would never meet in this movie and Malek's character would turn out to be a sort of origin for Dr. No. I'd like to see him cause all sorts of havoc, get an insight into the Blofeld/SPECTRE/SPECTRE operative underworld, perhaps see how he lost his hands (a sequence with Nomi?) and Bond try and track him down and ultimately fail. Leave the the finale of the movie on the brink of chaos and as opposed to the Bond 'missing presumed dead' idea at the end, see Craig returning to active service jaded, to play cards at 'Le Cercle' (pick up Connery's opening scene) knowing that he inevitably catches him in Dr No.
    Probably a terrible idea so awaiting it being ultimately picked apart, but I think it'd be a neat way to tie it in with the original franchise while giving CJF a sandbox to play in with all his dark themes!
    (APOLOGIES for double post but seemed silly to do them both as one as they're both on different topics!)
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    There's a certain degree of indirect discrimination that prohibits people associating the '007' number with anything aside the white male hegemony. Any attempt to decry it as a 'gimmick' undermines the importance the move is to certain people.

    I'm not against the Nomi as 007 idea as I'm sure I've made clear previously, but I think this is extremely presumptious and unfair on those who simply just like these trademark aspects of the Bond films as part of being escapist fantasy and enjoy them without any consideration for such social viewpoints.

    It is also possible for something to be a gimmick (unless it's key to the plot, which it probably isn't) and important to certain people at the same time. It doesn't necessarily undermine anything.

    There are obvious social implications as this is 2019 and everything is political. But that only occurs if we push a post-modern filter on this news and analyse some kind of political motivation behind the casting.

    There is a very very good chance that Lashana Lynch was the best person for the part and that she just happens to be a black woman.

    In this respect, there is nothing stopping you enjoying the film as a piece of entertainment. Remember, none of us know how it will be handled. We are merely reacting off the idea off our own built-in value system.

    Which is all very well and good, and I'm sure Lynch was the best person for the part and will do a great job. But unless they auditioned both genders from all races for the part (which they didn't), her being a black woman is besides the point - unless it's actually relevant to the story.

    If Nomi was being played by a white actress, it would still be a gimmick. If it were a black male, it would still be a gimmick. If it were a white male, it would still be a gimmick. And it's the gimmick that people rightly/wrongly have an issue with. I'm personally fine with it and think it'll add something different to the film.

    However, this is the problem with putting a political/social filter on these types of developments.....sometimes you end up looking at things that aren't there.

    Which is why your statements regarding people's reluctance to let go off a symbol of "white masculinity and strength" might not be the wisest.

    Spot on, Sir.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 17,241
    Which is all very well and good, and I'm sure Lynch was the best person for the part and will do a great job. But unless they auditioned both genders from all races for the part (which they didn't), her being a black woman is besides the point - unless it's actually relevant to the story.

    Going off topic from the "white masculinity" discussion a bit here (as I don't have anything to add); I've been thinking that Lynch being a black woman might mean that her character has Jamaican/Caribbean heritage? Has anything been written about Nomi's background?
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    edited July 2019 Posts: 467
    Provided that James Bond is still the lead and the hero in this movie, I don't give a particular damn whether he's 007 or KFBR392 during a few scenes. The code number is just a detail, which gets over fetishized by many. And picking Lashana Lynch as Nomi and the next 007 at MI6 could be actually interesting because of the potential for contrast. He's pure white bread, middle class, raised in public schools, while her own rise to the ranks of MI6 may have been more complicated, and she may know Jamaica much better than Bond. Confronting their methods and their approaches, finding that they still have something in common could have dramatic potential.

    Once again, there's no way that Bond 25 is the end of James Bond, that next time the emphasis will be on "007", with Nomi being the lead. It's about as significant to the character than when Fleming himself made him move to being 7777 for the time of a novel. Next time, Fleming didn't write a novel about the new 007 either.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited July 2019 Posts: 8,009
    Which is all very well and good, and I'm sure Lynch was the best person for the part and will do a great job. But unless they auditioned both genders from all races for the part (which they didn't), her being a black woman is besides the point - unless it's actually relevant to the story.

    Going off topic from the "white masculinity" discussion a bit here (as I don't have anything to add); I've been thinking that Lynch being a black woman might mean that her character has Jamaican/Caribbean heritage? Has anything been written about Nomi's background?

    Lynch is of Jamaican heritage, too. Nothing yet about Nomi's background, so I guess we'll have to see.

    @HildebrandRarity Giving Bond the temporary designation 7777 would be a nice little Easter egg, I think.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    Again, there’s a possibility that Craig’s Bond never officially returns to service as an MI-6 agent.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    I guess people are mad as the '007' moniker is associated with white masculinity and strength. The notion of associating that number with a black female emasculates the notion of the strong white male saving the world. It also may appear scary as the strong white male (Daniel Craig's Bond) will seemingly be subservient in rank to a young black woman (Lashana Lynch's 007).

    There's a certain degree of indirect discrimination that prohibits people associating the '007' number with anything aside the white male hegemony. Any attempt to decry it as a 'gimmick' undermines the importance the move is to certain people.

    I'm not against the Nomi as 007 idea as I'm sure I've made clear previously, but I think this is extremely presumptious and unfair on those who simply just like these trademark aspects of the Bond films as part of being escapist fantasy and enjoy them without any consideration for such social viewpoints.

    It is also possible for something to be a gimmick (unless it's key to the plot, which it probably isn't) and important to certain people at the same time. It doesn't necessarily undermine anything.

    There are obvious social implications as this is 2019 and everything is political. But that only occurs if we push a post-modern filter on this news and analyse some kind of political motivation behind the casting.

    There is a very very good chance that Lashana Lynch was the best person for the part and that she just happens to be a black woman.

    In this respect, there is nothing stopping you enjoying the film as a piece of entertainment. Remember, none of us know how it will be handled. We are merely reacting off the idea off our own built-in value system.

    Which is all very well and good, and I'm sure Lynch was the best person for the part and will do a great job. But unless they auditioned both genders from all races for the part (which they didn't), her being a black woman is besides the point - unless it's actually relevant to the story.

    If Nomi was being played by a white actress, it would still be a gimmick. If it were a black male, it would still be a gimmick. If it were a white male, it would still be a gimmick. And it's the gimmick that people rightly/wrongly have an issue with. I'm personally fine with it and think it'll add something different to the film.

    However, this is the problem with putting a political/social filter on these types of developments.....sometimes you end up looking at things that aren't there.

    Which is why your statements regarding people's reluctance to let go of a symbol of "white masculinity and strength" might not be the wisest.

    That's your opinion. (Note that I did not say "opinion.")

    My opinion is that, no matter what his or her political views, anyone who is on a James Bond forum nine months prior to the release of B25 is going to see B25 in the theater, regardless of whom Lynch plays or whom 007 is.
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 467
    talos7 wrote: »
    Again, there’s a possibility that Craig’s Bond never officially returns to service as an MI-6 agent.

    I don't think so. Remember that the 007 logo was displayed prominently when the film was announced, for instance on Twitter (where the account is @007). This weekend, the logo is still painted on the Formula 1 car. If they intended to have a film and a mission in which James Bond is never 007, even if there's some secrecy at work, they would have asked promo to downplay everything involving 007 for this one. Otherwise, people would get confused.
  • 007_Austria007_Austria Austria
    Posts: 13
    Univex wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Yes the drumbeat of racism, sexism and toxic , primarily white, masculinity , from the more socially aware and enlightened, continues.
    It’s such condescending tripe

    It really, really is.

    Mr. Cool

    Craig looks good there. When was this taken?

    Probably today at the British GP
Sign In or Register to comment.