4,726

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

[Edited by Barbel:

I said keep it impersonal- twice. Use PMs if you have to. No more of this open bickering.]

The name is Walker by the way.

4,727

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Miles Messervy wrote:
Bondpurist wrote:

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.

Last edited by emtiem (15th Apr 2019 08:34)

4,728

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

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.

4,729

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Revolver66 wrote:
emtiem wrote:
Revolver66 wrote:

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?

Last edited by emtiem (15th Apr 2019 08:47)

4,730

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Barbel wrote:

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.

4,731

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

emtiem wrote:
Revolver66 wrote:
emtiem wrote:

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?

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?

4,732

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Number24 wrote:

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.

4,733

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Revolver66 wrote:
emtiem wrote:
Revolver66 wrote:

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?

4,734

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Revolver66 wrote:
Number24 wrote:

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.

4,735

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

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?

4,736

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Number24 wrote:

The plan (according to the article) is only to give the 997 number to a female agent

No problem there.

4,737

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

There was a female 00 in the briefing  at the start of
TWINE.   ( apologies  if this has already been mentioned  )

"Let his death be a particularly unpleasant and humiliating one."

4,738

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Barbel wrote:
Number24 wrote:

The plan (according to the article) is only to give the 997 number to a female agent

No problem there.

ajb007/lol  ajb007/lol


Well, as anyone who can count sees in the article knows, it's 007. Apparently that excludes me today  ajb007/crap

4,739

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

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.

4,740

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

ichaice wrote:

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! ajb007/smile

I think it’s brilliant: having such a sharp writer onboard can’t be a bad thing.

4,741

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

emtiem wrote:
Revolver66 wrote:
emtiem wrote:


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.

Last edited by Revolver66 (15th Apr 2019 13:21)

4,742

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Let me qualify this by saying that this could be all crap and it may not happen. I am merely discussing the flaws in that supposed plotline

4,743

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

James Bond is James Bond. 007 is just the number associated with the designation in MI6. Being given the 007 number does not make one James Bond, be it a woman or man....it makes you a "00". The problem is, the number is so connected to the character of James Bond that reassigning it causes all kinds of problems. I haven't read Forever and A Day so I'm not familiar with any literary version of what happens with a "00" number once the agent retires, dies, etc.

4,744

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

emtiem wrote:
Revolver66 wrote:
Number24 wrote:

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.


Is it still against forum policy to dish out personal barbs?  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes

4,745

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

I think hiring Phoebe Waller-Bridge seems like a good idea. It looks like she can snappy and witty dialogue, and she even writes a espionage thriller series! Purvis and Wade are not very good at writing dialogue, so having Waller-Bridge polish the script might be just what's needed.
She has also said: "I suppose every time [something bad happens], I have that instinct to make that joke that distracts." Isn't that what Bond has been doing for decades?

Last edited by Number24 (15th Apr 2019 13:20)

4,746

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

HowardB wrote:

James Bond is James Bond. 007 is just the number associated with the designation in MI6. Being given the 007 number does not make one James Bond, be it a woman or man....it makes you a "00". The problem is, the number is so connected to the character of James Bond that reassigning it causes all kinds of problems. I haven't read Forever and A Day so I'm not familiar with any literary version of what happens with a "00" number once the agent retires, dies, etc.

James Bond and 007 are synonymous with one another and forever will be.

4,747

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Revolver66 wrote:
emtiem wrote:
Revolver66 wrote:

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.


Is it still against forum policy to dish out personal barbs?  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes

It most certainly is. Please PM me.

4,748

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Revolver66 wrote:
HowardB wrote:

James Bond is James Bond. 007 is just the number associated with the designation in MI6. Being given the 007 number does not make one James Bond, be it a woman or man....it makes you a "00". The problem is, the number is so connected to the character of James Bond that reassigning it causes all kinds of problems. I haven't read Forever and A Day so I'm not familiar with any literary version of what happens with a "00" number once the agent retires, dies, etc.

James Bond and 007 are synonymous with one another and forever will be.

+ 1

4,749

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

Barbel wrote:
Revolver66 wrote:
emtiem wrote:

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.


Is it still against forum policy to dish out personal barbs?  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes  ajb007/rolleyes

It most certainly is. Please PM me.

Done

4,750

Re: Craig is back: Discuss Bond 25 here

The Bond films will always change to keep  current.  Although in a
Recent article  it was pointed out that the BBC radio drama The
Archers is far more sexist  than any Bond film  ajb007/biggrin

"Let his death be a particularly unpleasant and humiliating one."