Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Well, then there’s this...007
Quote | Reply
I’ll just leave this here and see what happens.

https://www.theguardian.com/...es-bond-daniel-craig

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's actually pretty cool. I kind of like the idea of James Bond retiring or even getting killed some how and then having someone else step in to the 007 designation.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FFS.

Things have clearly got a bit silly now.

I don't bother with Bond movies anymore anyway. The old ones were a great romp, a sort of slightly tongue in cheek bit of action fun. Nowadays they try and make it edgy and gritty and show Bond as flawed and try and tick all the boxes for plot devices and social awareness and all that stuff and they are basically 2 hours of unwatchable, CGI-laden crap.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You would think that the studio leadership would have learned from previous shows that changed an iconic male character to a female character. It worked for Battlestar Galactica but Starbuck was only one character in a group and not the "lead" character. Dr. Who took a big hit when they changed the character from a male to a female, and many people never watched beyond the introduction of the character.

I get it, the studios want to be PC, want to get the female audience into the show, etc., but in the end it is really, really hard to change a title character so much and retain the original audience. We'll see if the Bond writers and directors have those kind of chops.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bond is a womanizer. That doesn't work as well in today's environ.

I'm not saying that makes me happy. It's a work of fiction. I prefer the classic Bond. Male, chest hair, British, wit, drinker, womanizer, Aston Martin cars only. Please.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
it's a publicity stunt to rile the folks who don't read past headlines.

To be fair, the money quote is buried near the bottom, and the article is long and pretty unreadable otherwise.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think that the " Bond " character should exist in perpetuity. Not interested in a Bond coping with aging and personal struggle. I really did like the first Daniel Craig movie Casino Royal.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
orphious wrote:
That's actually pretty cool. I kind of like the idea of James Bond retiring or even getting killed some how and then having someone else step in to the 007 designation.

I always assumed already that was what was supposed to have been happening. There have been what? 6 guys play him already, spread across 50 years or so with the movies set in all time periods. People weren't pretending they were all the same character were they?

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The new Doctor is pretty good though. The Doctor has always been a weird eclectic character and not really defined by a gender.

Bond is a womanizing playboy, it is core to the character, and thus makes it a poor choice.

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [Sulliesbrew] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sulliesbrew wrote:

Bond is a womanizing playboy, it is core to the character, and thus makes it a poor choice.

I think you missed the point, they are separating the code name 007 from the person James Bond... Bond was who Bond was.. 007 is just a top secret agent.

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vecchia capra wrote:
Dr. Who took a big hit when they changed the character from a male to a female, and many people never watched beyond the introduction of the character.

I'm going to disagree on this. Peter Capaldi killed my interest in the show. Jodie Whittiker made me want to watch it again.

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
orphious wrote:
That's actually pretty cool. I kind of like the idea of James Bond retiring or even getting killed some how and then having someone else step in to the 007 designation.

How very Dr. Who of you
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
j p o wrote:
orphious wrote:
That's actually pretty cool. I kind of like the idea of James Bond retiring or even getting killed some how and then having someone else step in to the 007 designation.

I always assumed already that was what was supposed to have been happening. There have been what? 6 guys play him already, spread across 50 years or so with the movies set in all time periods. People weren't pretending they were all the same character were they?

Uh but it was the same character... James Bond just the setting was different
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DavHamm wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:

Bond is a womanizing playboy, it is core to the character, and thus makes it a poor choice.

I think you missed the point, they are separating the code name 007 from the person James Bond... Bond was who Bond was.. 007 is just a top secret agent.

Exactly
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
j p o wrote:
orphious wrote:
That's actually pretty cool. I kind of like the idea of James Bond retiring or even getting killed some how and then having someone else step in to the 007 designation.


I always assumed already that was what was supposed to have been happening. There have been what? 6 guys play him already, spread across 50 years or so with the movies set in all time periods. People weren't pretending they were all the same character were they?

They were the same character played by different actors. A secret agent named James Bond with the 007 designation.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [Sulliesbrew] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent

If the next movie is about 007 with any other name other than James Bond the franchise is dead.

People like escapism
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
j p o wrote:
orphious wrote:
That's actually pretty cool. I kind of like the idea of James Bond retiring or even getting killed some how and then having someone else step in to the 007 designation.


I always assumed already that was what was supposed to have been happening. There have been what? 6 guys play him already, spread across 50 years or so with the movies set in all time periods. People weren't pretending they were all the same character were they?


Uh but it was the same character... James Bond just the setting was different

Uh, that was the question. Bond has never been my cup of tea, so I don't know my Bond universe. Is it supposed to be the same person through all the time, movies, and settings or is he like the Dread Pirate Roberts, same name, different guy?

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


If the next movie is about 007 with any other name other than James Bond the franchise is dead.

People like escapism

They could use any other OOXX code name and reboot the series there and it would be a non issue.

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
j p o wrote:
windywave wrote:
j p o wrote:
orphious wrote:
That's actually pretty cool. I kind of like the idea of James Bond retiring or even getting killed some how and then having someone else step in to the 007 designation.


I always assumed already that was what was supposed to have been happening. There have been what? 6 guys play him already, spread across 50 years or so with the movies set in all time periods. People weren't pretending they were all the same character were they?


Uh but it was the same character... James Bond just the setting was different

Uh, that was the question. Bond has never been my cup of tea, so I don't know my Bond universe. Is it supposed to be the same person through all the time, movies, and settings or is he like the Dread Pirate Roberts, same name, different guy?

Same guy... back story changed every few decades
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vecchia capra wrote:
Dr. Who took a big hit when they changed the character from a male to a female, and many people never watched beyond the introduction of the character.

Big hit? Hell no.
A hit at all? No.

Last season was the highest rated since the last David Tennant season in 2008. It was the second highest rated season of all 11 revival series - just beating Eccelston's season.
Even the least watched episode last season would have been one of the most watched Capaldi episodes.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [Sulliesbrew] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sulliesbrew wrote:
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


If the next movie is about 007 with any other name other than James Bond the franchise is dead.

People like escapism

They could use any other OOXX code name and reboot the series there and it would be a non issue.

Right but then not a James Bond movie
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [Sulliesbrew] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent

Thanks your link makes my point. There have been 2 002 one dies and another person gets there "spot" no where does it say after a 00 dies/retires that there designation is no longer used, it could be and in the case of 002 has been recycled to another agent.



00 Agents from the Eon film franchise
00-agentNameDescription002Bill Fairbanks, JohnA 002 first appears in Thunderball. He is shot through the neck and killed by Francisco Scaramanga, in Beirut, Lebanon, in 1969 (film version: The Man with the Golden Gun 1974).
In The Living Daylights film, another Agent 002, named "John", played by Glyn Baker; was training at Gibraltar, with 004 and 007. 002 was "killed" and eliminated from the exercise when he landed close to a waiting SAS guard.

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


If the next movie is about 007 with any other name other than James Bond the franchise is dead.

People like escapism


They could use any other OOXX code name and reboot the series there and it would be a non issue.


Right but then not a James Bond movie

I disagree the franchise is dead... I think it will continue just like the Rocky movies.. Which are now called creed...
So they transition from James Bond to 007 which I think 007 has played in some of the titles ? (at least the opening sequences if not the title directly)

So is Creed still the Rocky series? I think 007 will do the same, you can decide if its a new franchise or the old one.. I think in both cases its still the same franchise.

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [Sulliesbrew] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


No, that's not true. There are multiple 00 designations, and someone fills each spot when the previous agent dies or retires. Same as the code names "M" and "Q".

At least that's how it sometimes works. Looking over the history, it is really unclear. And, there have been 00 women before.
Last edited by: bluemonkeytri: Jul 15, 19 8:17
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DavHamm wrote:
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


If the next movie is about 007 with any other name other than James Bond the franchise is dead.

People like escapism


They could use any other OOXX code name and reboot the series there and it would be a non issue.


Right but then not a James Bond movie

I disagree the franchise is dead... I think it will continue just like the Rocky movies.. Which are now called creed...
So they transition from James Bond to 007 which I think 007 has played in some of the titles ? (at least the opening sequences if not the title directly)

So is Creed still the Rocky series? I think 007 will do the same, you can decide if its a new franchise or the old one.. I think in both cases its still the same franchise.

Creed is not a Rocky movie

They will reboot James Bond again. What I really would like to see is it done historically instead of contemporaries ala the Americans
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [Sulliesbrew] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sulliesbrew wrote:
The new Doctor is pretty good though. The Doctor has always been a weird eclectic character and not really defined by a gender.

Bond is a womanizing playboy, it is core to the character, and thus makes it a poor choice.

Who says the new 007 won't be a womanizer?

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
I’ll just leave this here and see what happens.

https://www.theguardian.com/...es-bond-daniel-craig

Jane Bond, the new 007? Please tell me it ain't so. There was a big to-do a few years ago when a black male was going to be the next James Bond. Surprised that a black female (yet alone any female) is being considered.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [scorpio516] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
scorpio516 wrote:
vecchia capra wrote:
Dr. Who took a big hit when they changed the character from a male to a female, and many people never watched beyond the introduction of the character.


Big hit? Hell no.
A hit at all? No.

Last season was the highest rated since the last David Tennant season in 2008. It was the second highest rated season of all 11 revival series - just beating Eccelston's season.
Even the least watched episode last season would have been one of the most watched Capaldi episodes.

The publications did a lot of spinning in their latest stories so what exactly happened is not clear. Right after the new series started the UK papers stated that a lot of the previous viewers dropped off, but afterwards a lot of new viewers were recruited, most notably "younger" viewers at the end of the latest season per the two publications I read.

So okay, Capaldi was a bit hard to follow after the previous Dr. Who actors, so there was a big jump in ratings. We stopped watching because the story lines, at least in the first episode with the female actor, did not have the same writers and went into a PC mode with the new writers. I watch SciFi and fantasy programs to escape current life, not reflect it so much.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
bad idea and it's not going to work... I wont even netflix it.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
DavHamm wrote:
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


If the next movie is about 007 with any other name other than James Bond the franchise is dead.

People like escapism


They could use any other OOXX code name and reboot the series there and it would be a non issue.


Right but then not a James Bond movie


I disagree the franchise is dead... I think it will continue just like the Rocky movies.. Which are now called creed...
So they transition from James Bond to 007 which I think 007 has played in some of the titles ? (at least the opening sequences if not the title directly)

So is Creed still the Rocky series? I think 007 will do the same, you can decide if its a new franchise or the old one.. I think in both cases its still the same franchise.


Creed is not a Rocky movie

They will reboot James Bond again. What I really would like to see is it done historically instead of contemporaries ala the Americans

That's how you call it google rockie movies and Creed and Creed II are listed. And here is the wiki link for the Rocky series https://en.wikipedia.org/.../Rocky_(film_series)

They also seem to think those 2 are included.

But if you say they are not in your world then yes the James Bond movies are done... But the 007 Franchise will start.

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [bluemonkeytri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
bluemonkeytri wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


No, that's not true. There are multiple 00 designations, and someone fills each spot when the previous agent dies or retires. Same as the code names "M" and "Q".

At least that's how it sometimes works. Looking over the history, it is really unclear. And, there have been 00 women before.

Agreed. In You Only Live Twice, Bond is transferred to another agency with the number 7777. The position of 007 in MI6 is left vacant, but, could have been filled.

I'm fine with someone other than Bond being 007, if the story line explains it. What I don't like is changing James Bond, himself, into something he is not.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DavHamm wrote:
windywave wrote:
DavHamm wrote:
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
windywave wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


If the next movie is about 007 with any other name other than James Bond the franchise is dead.

People like escapism


They could use any other OOXX code name and reboot the series there and it would be a non issue.


Right but then not a James Bond movie


I disagree the franchise is dead... I think it will continue just like the Rocky movies.. Which are now called creed...
So they transition from James Bond to 007 which I think 007 has played in some of the titles ? (at least the opening sequences if not the title directly)

So is Creed still the Rocky series? I think 007 will do the same, you can decide if its a new franchise or the old one.. I think in both cases its still the same franchise.


Creed is not a Rocky movie

They will reboot James Bond again. What I really would like to see is it done historically instead of contemporaries ala the Americans


That's how you call it google rockie movies and Creed and Creed II are listed. And here is the wiki link for the Rocky series https://en.wikipedia.org/.../Rocky_(film_series)

They also seem to think those 2 are included.

But if you say they are not in your world then yes the James Bond movies are done... But the 007 Franchise will start.

Agreed. Creed and Creed II are part of the Rocky series according to those who own the rights to the Rocky franchise.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vecchia capra wrote:
You would think that the studio leadership would have learned from previous shows that changed an iconic male character to a female character. It worked for Battlestar Galactica but Starbuck was only one character in a group and not the "lead" character. Dr. Who took a big hit when they changed the character from a male to a female, and many people never watched beyond the introduction of the character.

I get it, the studios want to be PC, want to get the female audience into the show, etc., but in the end it is really, really hard to change a title character so much and retain the original audience. We'll see if the Bond writers and directors have those kind of chops.

I agree with you. I remember a few years ago there was talk of Halle Berry's Bond character getting her own movie. And nobody cared. If you want to create a female secret call her 008 and see if the public shows up at the box office.

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Interesting thoughts.

My wife and I talked about this and I think I told her that I never liked Liutenant Yar from Next Generation but love the new Starbuck. When writing a typically male role for a female, or vice vera, it has to really be done well, cast well, written well, and ultimately it has to make sense.

Part of what I think made Starbuck work is that her skills were centered around piloting, which is hypothetically believable to be a fighter ace.

I think the biggest problem bond will face is not the believability of a female super spy (like Natasha Romanov), but that she'd specifically be filling the shoes of a traditionally male, womanizing playboy type character. Its not impossible, but will present a big writing challenge. I would say the same for an all male Charlie's Angels.





Quote:

You would think that the studio leadership would have learned from previous shows that changed an iconic male character to a female character. It worked for Battlestar Galactica but Starbuck was only one character in a group and not the "lead" character. Dr. Who took a big hit when they changed the character from a male to a female, and many people never watched beyond the introduction of the character.

I get it, the studios want to be PC, want to get the female audience into the show, etc., but in the end it is really, really hard to change a title character so much and retain the original audience. We'll see if the Bond writers and directors have those kind of chops.

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
bluemonkeytri wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


No, that's not true. There are multiple 00 designations, and someone fills each spot when the previous agent dies or retires. Same as the code names "M" and "Q".

At least that's how it sometimes works. Looking over the history, it is really unclear. And, there have been 00 women before.

Agreed. In You Only Live Twice, Bond is transferred to another agency with the number 7777. The position of 007 in MI6 is left vacant, but, could have been filled.

I'm fine with someone other than Bond being 007, if the story line explains it. What I don't like is changing James Bond, himself, into something he is not.

This
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
JSA wrote:
bluemonkeytri wrote:
Sulliesbrew wrote:
But that isn't true, OO7 is James Bond's code name. So they are really jumping the shark and dumping all of the history of the series for the sake of being "woke."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/00_Agent


No, that's not true. There are multiple 00 designations, and someone fills each spot when the previous agent dies or retires. Same as the code names "M" and "Q".

At least that's how it sometimes works. Looking over the history, it is really unclear. And, there have been 00 women before.


Agreed. In You Only Live Twice, Bond is transferred to another agency with the number 7777. The position of 007 in MI6 is left vacant, but, could have been filled.

I'm fine with someone other than Bond being 007, if the story line explains it. What I don't like is changing James Bond, himself, into something he is not.


This

Well then from what I read you should be fine with this, as Bond is retired, and Q calls 007 into the room and its the new women. Assume story moves on from there like most Bond movies did. Really doesn't need to be a big James goodbye party, Could be a cold, fast transition.

I am not a Bond fan, don't hate the movies just never seem to get around to watching them, can't tell you the last one I watched.

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sacrilegious to the history of James Bond
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [Sulliesbrew] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sulliesbrew wrote:
The Doctor has always been a weird eclectic character and not really defined by a gender. .

Not sure I agree with this. The Doctor has frequently exhibited some pretty traditional male roles, including some of the relationships they’ve had with their companions.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [summitt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
summitt wrote:
Sacrilegious to the history of James Bond

Why from everything that has been posted it seem to follow the rules of succession James is retiring and there is going to be a new 007.

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I feel like I'm open minded about most of this type of stuff, but a female bond just feels pointless. Just go with a whole new franchise. At this point, what's the Bond name really buying you anyway?
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [SH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SH wrote:
At this point, what's the Bond name really buying you anyway?

We're 42 posts in.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [SH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am pretty with you here. Bond is a guy. Mostly because he is a womanizer + gadgets + cars + Mi6. I am not saying you cant flip that on its head and make the spy a Femme Fatale but that just doesnt play into the lore of bond/007. its like if charlie' angles were dudes.

However, at the end of the day, I understand that the 007/bond franchise carries so much weight with it that people will go see a bond movie, to see a bond movie. They may not go see a 008 movie. So from the prospective of Hollywood/current licensing, I get why.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [patentattorney] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
softrun wrote:
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?

You realize James Bond is still a white guy, right?
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
softrun wrote:
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?


You realize James Bond is still a white guy, right?

I know that. But if we have 007 Jane Bond and it flops who will be the racists to blame? Audience? Critics? Someone gotta be guilty...
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
softrun wrote:
windywave wrote:
softrun wrote:
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?


You realize James Bond is still a white guy, right?

I know that. But if we have 007 Jane Bond and it flops who will be the racists to blame? Audience? Critics? Someone gotta be guilty...

Blame me. I'm getting accused of lots of shit these days. I'll probably be accused of being on the grassy knoll next even though I wasn't born yet
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
softrun wrote:
windywave wrote:
softrun wrote:
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?


You realize James Bond is still a white guy, right?


I know that. But if we have 007 Jane Bond and it flops who will be the racists to blame? Audience? Critics? Someone gotta be guilty...

Who did they blame when the Oceans XX (I forget) movie flopped?

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DavHamm wrote:
softrun wrote:
windywave wrote:
softrun wrote:
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?


You realize James Bond is still a white guy, right?


I know that. But if we have 007 Jane Bond and it flops who will be the racists to blame? Audience? Critics? Someone gotta be guilty...

Who did they blame when the Oceans XX (I forget) movie flopped?

I haven't seen that come to cable at all. Worse than the remade Ghostbusters?

It wasn't that those movies were redone with women. It was that they were redone with women badly.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Like many things. If the movie is a good movie most will not care. If the movie stinks, people will blame it on that.

I have no problem with 007 being a woman. It would be strange if James Bond was a women. Very similar to if Bruce Wayne was a women or Selena Kyle was a man.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think it's a great idea...just like the female Ghost Busters movie and Oceans 8.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think this must be Daniel Craig's last Bond movie. It almost piques my interest enough to see it to see how and why they bring him out of retirement.

I'm perfectly fine with agent 007 being a black woman. I think it's confused many that it's just a re-use of the agent code. The next Bond movie isn't going to have a black woman lead. NTTAWWT. It just wouldn't be a Bond movie, simply because James Bond isn't a black woman.

I predict that the next Bond movie will reboot the Bond character with a new male actor as 007. Just my guess.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
j p o wrote:
DavHamm wrote:
softrun wrote:
windywave wrote:
softrun wrote:
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?


You realize James Bond is still a white guy, right?


I know that. But if we have 007 Jane Bond and it flops who will be the racists to blame? Audience? Critics? Someone gotta be guilty...

Who did they blame when the Oceans XX (I forget) movie flopped?

I haven't seen that come to cable at all. Worse than the remade Ghostbusters?

It wasn't that those movies were redone with women. It was that they were redone with women badly.

It actually wasn’t terrible, but it was pretty blatantly just a female rip off of the regular Oceans formula.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [patentattorney] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patentattorney wrote:
Like many things. If the movie is a good movie most will not care. If the movie stinks, people will blame it on that.

I have no problem with 007 being a woman. It would be strange if James Bond was a women. Very similar to if Bruce Wayne was a women or Selena Kyle was a man.

They did a female secret agent movie just a couple of years ago, Atomic Blonde, starring Charlize Theron. It did ok, about $100 million in box office. In comparison, Spectre, the most recent Bond film, has north of $800 million. If we stick to a new IP however, say John Wick, that only has in the realm of $90 million.

It could work, but you have to make a decent movie and divorce the character from Bond. As I and others have said, you could easily make the next agent 00X and pick whatever number you want. You could build a 00 universe with a bunch of movies featuring different agents, and then bring them together for some spectacular Avengers style movie.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Remember the Bourne movies though. They were excellent... until the one with Jeremy Renner which was crap.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [RCCo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
..and the last one - which was an even bigger pile of shite
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
j p o wrote:
DavHamm wrote:
softrun wrote:
windywave wrote:
softrun wrote:
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?


You realize James Bond is still a white guy, right?


I know that. But if we have 007 Jane Bond and it flops who will be the racists to blame? Audience? Critics? Someone gotta be guilty...


Who did they blame when the Oceans XX (I forget) movie flopped?


I haven't seen that come to cable at all. Worse than the remade Ghostbusters?

It wasn't that those movies were redone with women. It was that they were redone with women badly.


It actually wasn’t terrible, but it was pretty blatantly just a female rip off of the regular Oceans formula.

So just like Ocean's 12 and 13 ripped off Oceans 11. And looking on the wiki's, better domestic gross and very similar critic scores on a smaller budget.

Not sure I heard an outcry when that movie was redone with men twice. Or Ghostbusters 2, wtf was that movie?

It isn't female casting that is causing the issue. It is bad remakes. Stop blaming the womins.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
patentattorney wrote:
Like many things. If the movie is a good movie most will not care. If the movie stinks, people will blame it on that.

I have no problem with 007 being a woman. It would be strange if James Bond was a women. Very similar to if Bruce Wayne was a women or Selena Kyle was a man.


They did a female secret agent movie just a couple of years ago, Atomic Blonde, starring Charlize Theron. It did ok, about $100 million in box office. In comparison, Spectre, the most recent Bond film, has north of $800 million. If we stick to a new IP however, say John Wick, that only has in the realm of $90 million.

It could work, but you have to make a decent movie and divorce the character from Bond. As I and others have said, you could easily make the next agent 00X and pick whatever number you want. You could build a 00 universe with a bunch of movies featuring different agents, and then bring them together for some spectacular Avengers style movie.

That is exactly what I was thinking. I would be more likely to follow several agents of Mi6 in a set of movies, that way Bond can still be Bond, and you can have every flavor of human interest you want as an agent.

They have only once reused an agent code name and it was at the very beginning, hardly makes it "canon."

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hollywood really loves killing franchises, don't they?

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [TheStroBro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheStroBro wrote:
Hollywood really loves killing franchises, don't they?


I have no idea what you are talking about...


Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
j p o wrote:
slowguy wrote:
j p o wrote:
DavHamm wrote:
softrun wrote:
windywave wrote:
softrun wrote:
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?


You realize James Bond is still a white guy, right?


I know that. But if we have 007 Jane Bond and it flops who will be the racists to blame? Audience? Critics? Someone gotta be guilty...


Who did they blame when the Oceans XX (I forget) movie flopped?


I haven't seen that come to cable at all. Worse than the remade Ghostbusters?

It wasn't that those movies were redone with women. It was that they were redone with women badly.


It actually wasn’t terrible, but it was pretty blatantly just a female rip off of the regular Oceans formula.

So just like Ocean's 12 and 13 ripped off Oceans 11. And looking on the wiki's, better domestic gross and very similar critic scores on a smaller budget.

Not sure I heard an outcry when that movie was redone with men twice. Or Ghostbusters 2, wtf was that movie?

It isn't female casting that is causing the issue. It is bad remakes. Stop blaming the womins.

Well, there’s a difference, even if only conceptually, between a sequel to a successful movie with the same people, and “reimagining” a movie with an entirely different cast, especially going from a group of men to a group of women.

The main problem being, sometimes the desire to have an all woman cast, or to cast minorities, comes at the expense of making a movie with good acting or plot. Sometimes that’s true with sequels too, but ideologically, it’s different.

The all female Ghostbusters was bad because the writing was shitty, and the women were not entertaining in their roles. It just adds insult to injury that people know the only reason that crap movie got made was to prove some sort of point about having funny women being just as good as funny men.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
j p o wrote:
slowguy wrote:
j p o wrote:
DavHamm wrote:
softrun wrote:
windywave wrote:
softrun wrote:
Who will be the first critic who will dare to write a negative review about a black female Bond and expose himself/herself to being called woman hating racist?


You realize James Bond is still a white guy, right?


I know that. But if we have 007 Jane Bond and it flops who will be the racists to blame? Audience? Critics? Someone gotta be guilty...


Who did they blame when the Oceans XX (I forget) movie flopped?


I haven't seen that come to cable at all. Worse than the remade Ghostbusters?

It wasn't that those movies were redone with women. It was that they were redone with women badly.


It actually wasn’t terrible, but it was pretty blatantly just a female rip off of the regular Oceans formula.


So just like Ocean's 12 and 13 ripped off Oceans 11. And looking on the wiki's, better domestic gross and very similar critic scores on a smaller budget.

Not sure I heard an outcry when that movie was redone with men twice. Or Ghostbusters 2, wtf was that movie?

It isn't female casting that is causing the issue. It is bad remakes. Stop blaming the womins.


Well, there’s a difference, even if only conceptually, between a sequel to a successful movie with the same people, and “reimagining” a movie with an entirely different cast, especially going from a group of men to a group of women.

The main problem being, sometimes the desire to have an all woman cast, or to cast minorities, comes at the expense of making a movie with good acting or plot. Sometimes that’s true with sequels too, but ideologically, it’s different.

The all female Ghostbusters was bad because the writing was shitty, and the women were not entertaining in their roles. It just adds insult to injury that people know the only reason that crap movie got made was to prove some sort of point about having funny women being just as good as funny men.

That part I can definitely agree with. I think I'd feel different about a female 007 than Ocean's or Ghostbusters. It would still be in the flow of the series. For the other two they came back many years later with no talk about the movies in the decade or two between movies and decided to trade on the name just to get a female-centric movie.

But if the writing, directing, and producing of any of those was top notch no one would be bitching. It wouldn't detract at all from the movie if it was good, but I agree, it does amplify it when it sucks.

It shows they were just riding a current trend to make a buck, not tell a story. I'm not sure Jar Jar is any less offensive if Darth is a woman though. So I'm back to it being the fact the movie sucked more than it being women.

How about they just stop shitting on previously good movies?

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [zed707] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
zed707 wrote:
I predict that the next Bond movie will reboot the Bond character with a new male actor as 007. Just my guess.
I agree. They tossed the SJW's a bone. I think it's all smoke and mirrors and the next Bond movie is a complete reboot.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [Perseus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't have a problem with a woman being 007, but then it's not a James Bond movie. Like the Creed movies, Rocky is in them, but to me, they aren't Rocky movies. I wonder if there will be "Bond Men" with outrageous names like Pussy Galore. Maybe Dick Throbbin?

I wanted to see Idris Elba as the next Bond.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [Perseus] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Perseus wrote:
zed707 wrote:
I predict that the next Bond movie will reboot the Bond character with a new male actor as 007. Just my guess.

I agree. They tossed the SJW's a bone. I think it's all smoke and mirrors and the next Bond movie is a complete reboot.

Hmmmm. I've read talk about them casting Idris Elba as the next Bond. Maybe the black female Bond is being filmed/considered to lesson the negative impact from those who wouldn't want a black Bond.

Personally, I think Elba would do great as JB. Though as Slowguy suggested above - they could open up the franchise by casting him as another 00X character so they could get several different movie lines going. I love the idea of them have multiple story lines and then converging.
Quote Reply
Re: Well, then there’s this...007 [rick_pcfl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rick_pcfl wrote:
Perseus wrote:
zed707 wrote:
I predict that the next Bond movie will reboot the Bond character with a new male actor as 007. Just my guess.

I agree. They tossed the SJW's a bone. I think it's all smoke and mirrors and the next Bond movie is a complete reboot.


Hmmmm. I've read talk about them casting Idris Elba as the next Bond. Maybe the black female Bond is being filmed/considered to lesson the negative impact from those who wouldn't want a black Bond.

Personally, I think Elba would do great as JB. Though as Slowguy suggested above - they could open up the franchise by casting him as another 00X character so they could get several different movie lines going. I love the idea of them have multiple story lines and then converging.
I believe Idris said he didn't want the role. I want a younger Bond. Give me someone who is 30-35. I don't mind a female secret agent, but not as 007/Bond. Make her a 00 agent, give her a good back story/personality and have them team up from time to time a la Avengers.
Quote Reply