You really don‘t get it. By „staight-forward“ I meant Bond is given an assignment and does his voodoo under the employment of her majesty’s government. No rouge, no trauma, no drama...
The refference to DAD just means that people will wish for what was long considered the worst time of Bond once we should be getting PC (in form of MeToo, etc.) with number 25.
I don't think you get it: you're saying people would wish for DAD instead of a film that doesn't have a straightforward Bond formula, but DAD had Bond going rogue and working on his own, getting traumatised by torture; and if the idea of PC stuff upsets you, it had a tough and capable female MI6 agent being sent on a mission by a tough and capable female M. Do you get it yet?
Ay, one last try: I said people will wish for an invisible car or tsunami surfing, once Bond dives into complex waters such as metoo, etc. Simply because such motives don‘t belong in an action adventure (the slow the film down and don‘t add anything unique to the plot.
Yes, I know Bond went rouge in DAD, but a lot of people don‘t want that in B25, probably because half of DC‘s tenure consisted of that.
B25 ideally should feature Bond simply fulfilling a given assignment.
So no Bond who goes rougue, suffers from childhood trauma of old age (so basically all the motives post CR).
This means: a movie like Dr. No, FRWL, TB, YOLT, OP, AVTAK, TND and many others. That is want I want DC‘s send-off to be.
So people will be asking for a movie like DAD, but not actually like DAD because that has stuff in it which you found too original too. Uh-huh: you make perfect sense
I can't believe a blurb in a Brit Tab that generally lacks any credibility has triggered this kind of almost unhinged response.
If there really is a female MI6 agent in Bond 25 what does that have to do with PC or Me Too? The author of that blurb obviously used
certain words and phrases to provoke extreme responses.
Yeah that's what the Mail does: it's a hideous rag which designs all of its output to provoke reactions from the bigots who read it.
I may be steering clear of this forum for the foreseeable future if the threads devolve into Twitter.
Agreed. Accusing people of being sexists and/or misogynists for simply expressing the view that a female agent assigned the number “007” is a silly bit of pandering (it is) is out of step with the usual level of decorum around here. This place should be above that kind of thing.
If it's true then my worst nightmares have come to take place on the screen in my favourite franchise. Quite possibly the worst idea in the history of Bond films. I'd rather see Bond surf a cgi tsunami again then surf a tsunami of kneejerk #metoo political correctness. Rubbish.
Because there's a woman in it?!
What's going on in this thread?
No not because there's a woman in it. That is not what I said and that is not what is being proposed at all in this supposed plot outline.
It's Because there is a woman playing 007, doing Bond's job in a Bond film. Looking at that objectively, how could you not draw the conclusion that it's being done with a PC objective? Secondly it is not sexist or misogynist to balk at that idea.
If it's true then my worst nightmares have come to take place on the screen in my favourite franchise. Quite possibly the worst idea in the history of Bond films. I'd rather see Bond surf a cgi tsunami again then surf a tsunami of kneejerk #metoo political correctness. Rubbish.
Because there's a woman in it?!
What's going on in this thread?
No not because there's a woman in it. That is not what I said and that is not what is being proposed at all in this supposed plot outline.
It's Because there is a woman playing 007, doing Bond's job in a Bond film. Looking at that objectively, how could you not draw the conclusion that it's being done with a PC objective? Secondly it is not sexist or misogynist to balk at that idea.
I doubt if anyone here has an issue with one potential story line involving a young female agent...If, however, the writing is designed to belittle Bond as a virtue-signalling initiative, we have every right to roll our eyes.
There has been some truly incredible female led films, including action films, released in the past five years or so—one can argue that a lot of them were only made/remade/rebooted because of the metoo era. From what I can recall though, all of those well received films did not include dialogue and scenes that go out of the way to, I guess, "rub it in" that it's a female, not a male, doing the hard yards/in charge/kicking ass etc—they were simply films where the lead character happened to be played by a female actor. I think they can definitely go that direction in B25 with a female 00 featured (a good % of IO's in modern agencies are female)...just not as 007. I agree with some of the above comments in that, by giving her that desig would very much seem to be PC directed. There's plenty of other numbers left, no harm in picking one that won't cause controversy.
There has been some truly incredible female led films, including action films, released in the past five years or so—one can argue that a lot of them were only made/remade/rebooted because of the metoo era. From what I can recall though, all of those well received films did not include dialogue and scenes that go out of the way to, I guess, "rub it in" that it's a female, not a male, doing the hard yards/in charge/kicking ass etc—they were simply films where the lead character happened to be played by a female actor. I think they can definitely go that direction in B25 with a female 00 featured (a good % of IO's in modern agencies are female)...just not as 007. I agree with some of the above comments in that, by giving her that desig would very much seem to be PC directed. There's plenty of other numbers left, no harm in picking one that won't cause controversy.
Well said. Let me add, I wouldn't be very keen if the plot point was a young male agent being given the 007 number after Bond's retirement. Which actually brings me to the next, fortunately non-political, question: what happens to a "00's" number once they are retired, killed, etc ?
There were rumors going back some time ago that there was a role for a young female MI6 agent that Bond would mentor, so it not surprising. The number thing seems much less plausible.
Maybe she'll be agent 0069 :007) ?
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
I may be steering clear of this forum for the foreseeable future if the threads devolve into Twitter.
Agreed. Accusing people of being sexists and/or misogynists for simply expressing the view that a female agent assigned the number “007” is a silly bit of pandering (it is) is out of step with the usual level of decorum around here. This place should be above that kind of thing.
It isn’t pandering. Bond has retired as we saw at the end of the last film, why is it a problem that the 007 number might be assigned to someone else? That’s a pretty logical bit of plotting.
I see a couple of members link this plot twist to #MeToo. That's a misunderstanding. #MeToo is about unwanted sexual advances, so that movement is irrelevant to the New rumoured plot twist.
If it's true then my worst nightmares have come to take place on the screen in my favourite franchise. Quite possibly the worst idea in the history of Bond films. I'd rather see Bond surf a cgi tsunami again then surf a tsunami of kneejerk #metoo political correctness. Rubbish.
Because there's a woman in it?!
What's going on in this thread?
No not because there's a woman in it. That is not what I said and that is not what is being proposed at all in this supposed plot outline.
It's Because there is a woman playing 007, doing Bond's job in a Bond film. Looking at that objectively, how could you not draw the conclusion that it's being done with a PC objective? Secondly it is not sexist or misogynist to balk at that idea.
The idea of a woman having a job in a film must be being done from a PC point of view? I don’t understand that point of view at all I’m afraid: women are real people and have jobs all the time.
Do you guys really not remember that M was made into a lady? Are you still baulking at that? Or have you made up some excuse as to why that’s different, despite not knowing anything about this possible new female character?
That's covered in the latest Bond novel, "Forever And A Day".
Indeed; and it was something that the film which became ‘Living Daylights’ originally featured: a young Bond working alongside the original 007, who is killed.
I did not see fans balking when these were revealed. It’s just a number.
No not because there's a woman in it. That is not what I said and that is not what is being proposed at all in this supposed plot outline.
It's Because there is a woman playing 007, doing Bond's job in a Bond film. Looking at that objectively, how could you not draw the conclusion that it's being done with a PC objective? Secondly it is not sexist or misogynist to balk at that idea.
The idea of a woman having a job in a film must be being done from a PC point of view? I don’t understand that point of view at all I’m afraid: women are real people and have jobs all the time.
Do you guys really not remember that M was made into a lady? Are you still baulking at that? Or have you made up some excuse as to why that’s different, despite not knowing anything about this possible new female character?
It is completely different to the role of M and you know it. 007 is James Bond. This plot would of course be intended to be progressive and PC. And what would be more PC than to have Bond mentor a new female 007 to carry on the mantle?
But let me ask you this question - once Craig quits the franchise, what would you think of having a female James Bond? So the next Bond (007) would be a woman and EON would produce films around her.
I see a couple of members link this plot twist to #MeToo. That's a misunderstanding. #MeToo is about unwanted sexual advances, so that movement is irrelevant to the New rumoured plot twist.
The #metoo age has undoubtedly changed cinema and has shifted the goal posts. In that climate, films and their heroes are affected. James Bond too many is a symbol of alpha-male chauvinism and there are many in the industry that would want to turn that symbol into one that aligns with their current moral virtues.
So in my opinion, if this plot twist is accurate, then there is no way that the feeling in Hollywood that #metoo generated hasn't influenced that to some degree. Remember, Bond can be very reactionary to whatever is happening in the industry at the time.
No not because there's a woman in it. That is not what I said and that is not what is being proposed at all in this supposed plot outline.
It's Because there is a woman playing 007, doing Bond's job in a Bond film. Looking at that objectively, how could you not draw the conclusion that it's being done with a PC objective? Secondly it is not sexist or misogynist to balk at that idea.
The idea of a woman having a job in a film must be being done from a PC point of view? I don’t understand that point of view at all I’m afraid: women are real people and have jobs all the time.
Do you guys really not remember that M was made into a lady? Are you still baulking at that? Or have you made up some excuse as to why that’s different, despite not knowing anything about this possible new female character?
It is completely different to the role of M and you know it.
Do I? A man’s role taken by a woman. I would suggest it’s only different to you because you’re used to it. This is feeling a bit like the ‘blond Bond’ thing all over again.
What exactly is different other than ‘it just is and you know it’?
007 is James Bond. This plot would of course be intended to be progressive and PC. And what would be more PC than to have Bond mentor a new female 007 to carry on the mantle?
If you’re asking me to believe that it would be unacceptable for anyone but a man to to do Bond’s job, then I can’t see any other way to describe that than sexist; I’m sorry.
But let me ask you this question - once Craig quits the franchise, what would you think of having a female James Bond? So the next Bond (007) would be a woman and EON would produce films around her.
What are your thoughts?
I don’t want a woman Bond; Bond is defined in many ways by his masculinity. But we’re not discussing that, we’re just talking about this bizarre reaction to the idea of a woman daring to be cast as a double O: something we saw in World is Not Enough, not to mention various books like Devil May Care. Where was this reaction then?
I see a couple of members link this plot twist to #MeToo. That's a misunderstanding. #MeToo is about unwanted sexual advances, so that movement is irrelevant to the New rumoured plot twist.
The #metoo age has undoubtedly changed cinema and has shifted the goal posts. In that climate, films and their heroes are affected. James Bond too many is a symbol of alpha-male chauvinism and there are many in the industry that would want to turn that symbol into one that aligns with their current moral virtues.
That started happening back when Bond made a quiche. If you still want him slapping helpless ladies and exclaiming ‘a woman!’ when he meets a female scientist then I’m afraid that boat set sail over thirty five years ago.
I see Your point, but I still think there are some strange reactions in this thread. The plan (according to the article) is only to give the 997 number to a female agent for a while because Bond retires. Bond will be re-activated later in the movie and get his number back. Nothing indicates that the 007 in the next movie will be female. I too think making someone else 007 (for a while) after Bond retires is a bad idea, but reading some members here it seems like the gender of the new 007 is the problem and not the act of giving the number to someone other than Bond. Why? Don't they remember Thunderball showed in a short moment a female 00-agent during the briefing scene? If they could have a female 00-agent in 1965, why is this a problem in 2019?
A friend recommended Fleabag to me. I watched about 5 mins of it and turned it off. I hope no one from that programme is involved in the new Bond flick.
A friend recommended Fleabag to me. I watched about 5 mins of it and turned it off. I hope no one from that programme is involved in the new Bond flick.
Bit of a problem there as the leading man this series was the baddie in the previous Bond film!
I think it’s brilliant: having such a sharp writer onboard can’t be a bad thing.
The idea of a woman having a job in a film must be being done from a PC point of view? I don’t understand that point of view at all I’m afraid: women are real people and have jobs all the time.
Do you guys really not remember that M was made into a lady? Are you still baulking at that? Or have you made up some excuse as to why that’s different, despite not knowing anything about this possible new female character?
It is completely different to the role of M and you know it.
Do I? A man’s role taken by a woman. I would suggest it’s only different to you because you’re used to it. This is feeling a bit like the ‘blond Bond’ thing all over again.
What exactly is different other than ‘it just is and you know it’?
007 is James Bond. This plot would of course be intended to be progressive and PC. And what would be more PC than to have Bond mentor a new female 007 to carry on the mantle?
If you’re asking me to believe that it would be unacceptable for anyone but a man to to do Bond’s job, then I can’t see any other way to describe that than sexist; I’m sorry.
But let me ask you this question - once Craig quits the franchise, what would you think of having a female James Bond? So the next Bond (007) would be a woman and EON would produce films around her.
What are your thoughts?
I don’t want a woman Bond; Bond is defined in many ways by his masculinity. But we’re not discussing that, we’re just talking about this bizarre reaction to the idea of a woman daring to be cast as a double O: something we saw in World is Not Enough, not to mention various books like Devil May Care. Where was this reaction then?
You would suggest that it affects me because I am used to 007 being James Bond who is a man? I was used to M being played by a man for years... when Judi came on abroad did it bother me? Of course not. Why? Because it does not affect the role of Bond one iota.
And no we are not discussing the 'bizarre reaction to a woman being cast as a double-o', we are discussing a woman playing the 007 in the new JAMES BOND movie. It's a completely different kettle of fish. Why? Because 007 is James Bond. Plain and Simple. You ask someone on the street who James Bond is, they say 007. You ask another who 007 is, they say James Bond. You ask someone on the street who 009 is, they say huh? 007 is Bond's identity. It is his motivation, his duty, it informs his every move. It is key to his character.
It is not like we're objecting to a woman playing 009 or some other random 00 like in TWINE, we're not against women in James Bond movies, so please don't try and make it sound as such. What we are against is a woman playing James Bonds role as 007 in a James Bond movie. How can you not understand that?
Secondly, I find it interesting that you would defend a woman playing 007 in a Bond film along side Daniel Craig yet you draw the line at an autonomous female Bond character with her own narrative agency... so it seems that even you have a limit to what you would accept from a woman on the screen.
So you're basically saying that you accept a female playing Bond's role as 007, yet you couldn't accept that character on it's own without that male figurehead in her own Bond film series?
You say that Bond is defined by masculinity? So by that statement are you saying that a woman couldn't do a man's job? Are you saying that a female independent character couldn't exude her own sexual dominance, physical strength and sophistication like a typical masculine Bond character can? Sorry then by your own rational, you're a sexist.
Again, if this plot is actually correct, then the filmmakers know that they can't actually cast a woman as James Bond after Craig because even supposed feminists would not accept it, so they're doing the next best thing. Have 007 be a woman and Bond can be encouraging her on because #timesup.
Comments
So people will be asking for a movie like DAD, but not actually like DAD because that has stuff in it which you found too original too. Uh-huh: you make perfect sense
Yeah that's what the Mail does: it's a hideous rag which designs all of its output to provoke reactions from the bigots who read it.
Notice the coverage in other newspapers doesn't use any of the language designed to make people angry about so-called 'virtue signalling' etc.:
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/apr/14/james-bond-script-phoebe-waller-bridge-fleabag-daniel-craig
I said avoid making it personal, emtiem.
Then you should have phrased it differently.
Agreed. Accusing people of being sexists and/or misogynists for simply expressing the view that a female agent assigned the number “007” is a silly bit of pandering (it is) is out of step with the usual level of decorum around here. This place should be above that kind of thing.
No not because there's a woman in it. That is not what I said and that is not what is being proposed at all in this supposed plot outline.
It's Because there is a woman playing 007, doing Bond's job in a Bond film. Looking at that objectively, how could you not draw the conclusion that it's being done with a PC objective? Secondly it is not sexist or misogynist to balk at that idea.
Correct. Well said.
Anyway I think part of this comment sums up all of this nicely
There has been some truly incredible female led films, including action films, released in the past five years or so—one can argue that a lot of them were only made/remade/rebooted because of the metoo era. From what I can recall though, all of those well received films did not include dialogue and scenes that go out of the way to, I guess, "rub it in" that it's a female, not a male, doing the hard yards/in charge/kicking ass etc—they were simply films where the lead character happened to be played by a female actor. I think they can definitely go that direction in B25 with a female 00 featured (a good % of IO's in modern agencies are female)...just not as 007. I agree with some of the above comments in that, by giving her that desig would very much seem to be PC directed. There's plenty of other numbers left, no harm in picking one that won't cause controversy.
Well said. Let me add, I wouldn't be very keen if the plot point was a young male agent being given the 007 number after Bond's retirement. Which actually brings me to the next, fortunately non-political, question: what happens to a "00's" number once they are retired, killed, etc ?
Maybe she'll be agent 0069 :007) ?
I said keep it impersonal- twice. Use PMs if you have to. No more of this open bickering.]
IG: @thebondarchives
Check it out, you won’t be disappointed
It isn’t pandering. Bond has retired as we saw at the end of the last film, why is it a problem that the 007 number might be assigned to someone else? That’s a pretty logical bit of plotting.
The idea of a woman having a job in a film must be being done from a PC point of view? I don’t understand that point of view at all I’m afraid: women are real people and have jobs all the time.
Do you guys really not remember that M was made into a lady? Are you still baulking at that? Or have you made up some excuse as to why that’s different, despite not knowing anything about this possible new female character?
Indeed; and it was something that the film which became ‘Living Daylights’ originally featured: a young Bond working alongside the original 007, who is killed.
I did not see fans balking when these were revealed. It’s just a number.
It is completely different to the role of M and you know it. 007 is James Bond. This plot would of course be intended to be progressive and PC. And what would be more PC than to have Bond mentor a new female 007 to carry on the mantle?
But let me ask you this question - once Craig quits the franchise, what would you think of having a female James Bond? So the next Bond (007) would be a woman and EON would produce films around her.
What are your thoughts?
The #metoo age has undoubtedly changed cinema and has shifted the goal posts. In that climate, films and their heroes are affected. James Bond too many is a symbol of alpha-male chauvinism and there are many in the industry that would want to turn that symbol into one that aligns with their current moral virtues.
So in my opinion, if this plot twist is accurate, then there is no way that the feeling in Hollywood that #metoo generated hasn't influenced that to some degree. Remember, Bond can be very reactionary to whatever is happening in the industry at the time.
Do I? A man’s role taken by a woman. I would suggest it’s only different to you because you’re used to it. This is feeling a bit like the ‘blond Bond’ thing all over again.
What exactly is different other than ‘it just is and you know it’?
If you’re asking me to believe that it would be unacceptable for anyone but a man to to do Bond’s job, then I can’t see any other way to describe that than sexist; I’m sorry.
I don’t want a woman Bond; Bond is defined in many ways by his masculinity. But we’re not discussing that, we’re just talking about this bizarre reaction to the idea of a woman daring to be cast as a double O: something we saw in World is Not Enough, not to mention various books like Devil May Care. Where was this reaction then?
That started happening back when Bond made a quiche. If you still want him slapping helpless ladies and exclaiming ‘a woman!’ when he meets a female scientist then I’m afraid that boat set sail over thirty five years ago.
No problem there.
TWINE. ( apologies if this has already been mentioned )
Well, as anyone who can count sees in the article knows, it's 007. Apparently that excludes me today
Bit of a problem there as the leading man this series was the baddie in the previous Bond film!
I think it’s brilliant: having such a sharp writer onboard can’t be a bad thing.
You would suggest that it affects me because I am used to 007 being James Bond who is a man? I was used to M being played by a man for years... when Judi came on abroad did it bother me? Of course not. Why? Because it does not affect the role of Bond one iota.
And no we are not discussing the 'bizarre reaction to a woman being cast as a double-o', we are discussing a woman playing the 007 in the new JAMES BOND movie. It's a completely different kettle of fish. Why? Because 007 is James Bond. Plain and Simple. You ask someone on the street who James Bond is, they say 007. You ask another who 007 is, they say James Bond. You ask someone on the street who 009 is, they say huh? 007 is Bond's identity. It is his motivation, his duty, it informs his every move. It is key to his character.
It is not like we're objecting to a woman playing 009 or some other random 00 like in TWINE, we're not against women in James Bond movies, so please don't try and make it sound as such. What we are against is a woman playing James Bonds role as 007 in a James Bond movie. How can you not understand that?
Secondly, I find it interesting that you would defend a woman playing 007 in a Bond film along side Daniel Craig yet you draw the line at an autonomous female Bond character with her own narrative agency... so it seems that even you have a limit to what you would accept from a woman on the screen.
So you're basically saying that you accept a female playing Bond's role as 007, yet you couldn't accept that character on it's own without that male figurehead in her own Bond film series?
You say that Bond is defined by masculinity? So by that statement are you saying that a woman couldn't do a man's job? Are you saying that a female independent character couldn't exude her own sexual dominance, physical strength and sophistication like a typical masculine Bond character can? Sorry then by your own rational, you're a sexist.
Again, if this plot is actually correct, then the filmmakers know that they can't actually cast a woman as James Bond after Craig because even supposed feminists would not accept it, so they're doing the next best thing. Have 007 be a woman and Bond can be encouraging her on because #timesup.