If you have trouble seeing Bond's character as a woman, watch Atomic Blonde. It's a great example of a woman having those qualities, both good and ill.
If you have trouble seeing Bond's character as a woman, watch Atomic Blonde. It's a great example of a woman having those qualities, both good and ill.
Not only that, the first episode dedicated a decent amount of screen time just to delivering a lecture about traditional suiting. They accomplished more education in 10 minutes than Tan France on...
Not only that, the first episode dedicated a decent amount of screen time just to delivering a lecture about traditional suiting. They accomplished more education in 10 minutes than Tan France on Queer Eye has pulled off in 2 seasons.
You make the distinction between James Bond and Agent 007 above and I think it applies here, too. James Bond is an individual and has an origin story in that castle from Skyfall. He is the owner...
there are certain qualities to Bond, many of which are negative, that I just can't associate with a woman.
You make the distinction between James Bond and Agent 007 above and I think it applies here, too. James Bond is an individual and has an origin story in that castle from Skyfall. He is the owner of these traits.
Agent 007, is a code name for an MI6 intelligence officer. I think it's in one of the older movies where there is a mention by M or Q of "the previous 005" or something - implying that the individuals (Craig as Bond vs Lynch as whomever) can interchangeably be Agent 007.
This makes sense to me because I don't think, even in this age of half-baked-token-representational-victory-reboots, any studio head or director would have a black woman go up to someone and introduce herself as James.
I once briefly dated a girl called Jaimes. It's pronounced the same. So.. I know this isn't what they're doing but if it were - I'm sure Bond has plenty of kids of all sorts of colours all around...
have a black woman go up to someone and introduce herself as James.
I once briefly dated a girl called Jaimes. It's pronounced the same.
So.. I know this isn't what they're doing but if it were - I'm sure Bond has plenty of kids of all sorts of colours all around the world that he's never met who could have been named after him.
Ian Fleming stated that the name James Bond is a code name for 007. The lower the agent number (008, 007, 006, 005, 004, 003, 002, 001) the more badass the agent. As a better agent dies off or is...
Ian Fleming stated that the name James Bond is a code name for 007. The lower the agent number (008, 007, 006, 005, 004, 003, 002, 001) the more badass the agent. As a better agent dies off or is killed off, the ones below move up and are given tougher assignments.
So they are all 007's are James Bond, they just aren't the same physical person. He did this also to account for an actor aging.
Lastly, he was very sexist and would turn over in his grave at a woman being 007. Or any of the agents.
You're not wrong. But as far as the films are concerned, we know much more about Bond/007 as 007 than as Bond. And even still, if we are serious about the Bond cinematic universe the guy has to...
The series is called James Bond
You're not wrong. But as far as the films are concerned, we know much more about Bond/007 as 007 than as Bond. And even still, if we are serious about the Bond cinematic universe the guy has to age eventually right? Like how do his battles with the Soviet Russians make sense if he's still middle aged in the 2010s?
You are betting the James Bond series
I take your point. But, I would add that in this era where ravishing white male saviors bouncing from hot babe to hot babe is out of style they had to make an overture to keep the people in their seats. Yeah it's a gamble on a series that is actually more profitable every year. But in this instance taking the conservative tack means hitching your wagon to a horse with a long history of misogyny and other problematic tropes.
Now. Do I think a representation casting is gonna fix this? No. No I do not. I am cynical as fuck and believe they are just doing this to be trendy and rainbow wash over the history of the Bond series. Though in the end I am just stoked for a new movie cuz (problematic tropes aside) bond movies are fucking awesome and I don't think the main character being a woman of color is gonna change that. Even if her casting is an act of cynical political maneuvering.
I'm really excited for this new take on 007, but I can kind of understand where you're coming from. Part of what I love about the classic Bond movies is how campy they are, and while I certainly...
I'm really excited for this new take on 007, but I can kind of understand where you're coming from. Part of what I love about the classic Bond movies is how campy they are, and while I certainly think a woman would without a doubt be able to pull it off, I think it's kind of set in my mind "but James Bond! He's a guy!"
I don't mean to come across as sexist, or anything like that, I think we've just gotten used to a particular type of character and a particular set of characteristics that it seems difficult to associate a woman with the same role. It's a little easier with a show like doctor who, where to replace the actor they have the main character "regenerate". I know they still have an explanation in Bond leaving and a new agent being brought in under his codename, but it almost feels like the end of an era.
Sorry for the long-winded message, I was just reading about this this morning and wanted to throw in my two cents.
One of my favorite Bond moments was when M said straight to Bond's face "I think you're a sexist, misogynst dinosaur, a relic of the cold war." I thought "Oh shit, they just called him out for...
It would flip the entire series on its head. Maybe its time for that. Time to try something new. With that said it's really not James Bond anymore without the James Bond qualities.
One of my favorite Bond moments was when M said straight to Bond's face "I think you're a sexist, misogynst dinosaur, a relic of the cold war." I thought "Oh shit, they just called him out for what he is! Maybe this'll be new!" --... but then he just kinda went on being Bond.
The latest ones have all felt like he's been sleepwalking through the stories. Wonderful, hypnotic production value, but otherwise meh. I could easily see it needing a good flip on its head.
The lens shifted though. Instead of showing his being Bond as a "Women want him, men want to be him!" escapist adventure romp, it became darker and he seems much more tortured and less...
One of my favorite Bond moments was when M said straight to Bond's face "I think you're a sexist, misogynst dinosaur, a relic of the cold war." I thought "Oh shit, they just called him out for what he is! Maybe this'll be new!" --... but then he just kinda went on being Bond.
The lens shifted though. Instead of showing his being Bond as a "Women want him, men want to be him!" escapist adventure romp, it became darker and he seems much more tortured and less aspirational than in the previous iterations (Timothy Dalton exempted).
Basically they turned him into a rich Spike Spiegel.
I’m a bond fan since Roger Moore. I can’t think of anything about 007 that’s incompatible with the female genre. My only disappointment is knowing how awesome Idris Elba would be. The guy fits the...
I’m a bond fan since Roger Moore. I can’t think of anything about 007 that’s incompatible with the female genre. My only disappointment is knowing how awesome Idris Elba would be. The guy fits the role like a glove.
From what I've read it looks like Craig's bond is still the lead role in the movie, but he's called out of retirement and Lynch's character is the agent who has taken on the 007 codename. Sounds...
From what I've read it looks like Craig's bond is still the lead role in the movie, but he's called out of retirement and Lynch's character is the agent who has taken on the 007 codename.
I suspect it's a "passing the torch" film to transition the series.
From what I've read it looks like Craig's bond is still the lead role in the movie, but he's called out of retirement and Lynch's character is the agent who has taken on the 007 codename.
Sounds like a Bond film to me.
I suspect it's a "passing the torch" film to transition the series.
I have to disagree. The movies are much more about 007 the agent than James Bond the man. Aside from some of the newer movies and the original books, Bond's origin story and life outside of MI6 is...
I have to disagree. The movies are much more about 007 the agent than James Bond the man. Aside from some of the newer movies and the original books, Bond's origin story and life outside of MI6 is pretty much untouched by the films. I am excited for the post-Bond 007 era. To me it's a way to keep the series fresh and not have this weird reality-bending unaging iterative timeline where Bond is always roughly the same age for decades on end.
My god, did any of you RTFA? I'm disappointed in tildes. I thought we were better here. For those of you who are only here for the comments, Lynch is adopting the 007 codename, and is NOT...
My god, did any of you RTFA?
I'm disappointed in tildes. I thought we were better here.
For those of you who are only here for the comments, Lynch is adopting the 007 codename, and is NOT portraying another "Bond". James Bond is still set to be a character in this film. Seems a lot of you are worried that she was actually playing as James Bond.
I'd have to double check but I'm almost certain that more than half of the movies are not based on Fleming's books at this point. Also let's be honest, how many people who know about Bond have...
I'd have to double check but I'm almost certain that more than half of the movies are not based on Fleming's books at this point. Also let's be honest, how many people who know about Bond have ever read the books which are, as you imply, not even very good.
Having a female MI6 agent in 2019 isn't "shoehorning diversity" into anything. It's just how the world is now (and how it should have been all along, really). Bond hasn't been stuck in the 60s for quite some time.
btw, Charlie Higson's Young Bond books are far superior to Fleming's work and well worth a read.
The issue is not who plays the character of Bond (still Daniel Craig) but the fact that the whole series is misogynistic at basically every turn and only exists for anti-Soviet propaganda value.
The issue is not who plays the character of Bond (still Daniel Craig) but the fact that the whole series is misogynistic at basically every turn and only exists for anti-Soviet propaganda value.
I am inclined to agree. If Bond just isn't reconcilable with modern values and attitudes (not even in a way that clearly casts his chauvinism in a negative light), then so-be-it, but if so then I...
I am inclined to agree. If Bond just isn't reconcilable with modern values and attitudes (not even in a way that clearly casts his chauvinism in a negative light), then so-be-it, but if so then I think it's far better to simply call it time on the character than to try and give the franchise a woke paint-job.
For a few years now I've thought that Zöe Bell would make a great 007-like agent. She that perfect balance between 'tough girl' that still remains extremely feminine. She's also fun and funny --...
For a few years now I've thought that Zöe Bell would make a great 007-like agent. She that perfect balance between 'tough girl' that still remains extremely feminine. She's also fun and funny -- which is key -- while still maintaining a 'cool' aesthetic.
For me, as much as I like Bond as a series, asethetically, Mission: Impossible has produced better films both in excitement and franchise consistency. M:I also has more wiggle room and isn't held back by the legacy of Bond -- which is a strength. They haven't really branched out a lot, but if they decided to, there wouldn't be any rioting.
For males, I was really hoping that they'd go with Tom Hardy or Idris Elba and cast Nikolaj Coster-Waldau as the big bad.
If you have trouble seeing Bond's character as a woman, watch Atomic Blonde. It's a great example of a woman having those qualities, both good and ill.
Kingsman is in that niche as well. Takes the piss out of it, but does so while jumping in all the way.
Not only that, the first episode dedicated a decent amount of screen time just to delivering a lecture about traditional suiting. They accomplished more education in 10 minutes than Tan France on Queer Eye has pulled off in 2 seasons.
Instead of having the hero(ine) make the fashion statements, they'll have her harem of eye-candy conquests do it instead hahaha.
You make the distinction between James Bond and Agent 007 above and I think it applies here, too. James Bond is an individual and has an origin story in that castle from Skyfall. He is the owner of these traits.
Agent 007, is a code name for an MI6 intelligence officer. I think it's in one of the older movies where there is a mention by M or Q of "the previous 005" or something - implying that the individuals (Craig as Bond vs Lynch as whomever) can interchangeably be Agent 007.
This makes sense to me because I don't think, even in this age of half-baked-token-representational-victory-reboots, any studio head or director would have a black woman go up to someone and introduce herself as James.
I once briefly dated a girl called Jaimes. It's pronounced the same.
So.. I know this isn't what they're doing but if it were - I'm sure Bond has plenty of kids of all sorts of colours all around the world that he's never met who could have been named after him.
...that's an excellent point! And you know what that means!!
UNLIMITED SPIN-OFFS!!!!!!!!!!
Ian Fleming stated that the name James Bond is a code name for 007. The lower the agent number (008, 007, 006, 005, 004, 003, 002, 001) the more badass the agent. As a better agent dies off or is killed off, the ones below move up and are given tougher assignments.
So they are all 007's are James Bond, they just aren't the same physical person. He did this also to account for an actor aging.
Lastly, he was very sexist and would turn over in his grave at a woman being 007. Or any of the agents.
You're not wrong. But as far as the films are concerned, we know much more about Bond/007 as 007 than as Bond. And even still, if we are serious about the Bond cinematic universe the guy has to age eventually right? Like how do his battles with the Soviet Russians make sense if he's still middle aged in the 2010s?
I take your point. But, I would add that in this era where ravishing white male saviors bouncing from hot babe to hot babe is out of style they had to make an overture to keep the people in their seats. Yeah it's a gamble on a series that is actually more profitable every year. But in this instance taking the conservative tack means hitching your wagon to a horse with a long history of misogyny and other problematic tropes.
Now. Do I think a representation casting is gonna fix this? No. No I do not. I am cynical as fuck and believe they are just doing this to be trendy and rainbow wash over the history of the Bond series. Though in the end I am just stoked for a new movie cuz (problematic tropes aside) bond movies are fucking awesome and I don't think the main character being a woman of color is gonna change that. Even if her casting is an act of cynical political maneuvering.
I'm really excited for this new take on 007, but I can kind of understand where you're coming from. Part of what I love about the classic Bond movies is how campy they are, and while I certainly think a woman would without a doubt be able to pull it off, I think it's kind of set in my mind "but James Bond! He's a guy!"
I don't mean to come across as sexist, or anything like that, I think we've just gotten used to a particular type of character and a particular set of characteristics that it seems difficult to associate a woman with the same role. It's a little easier with a show like doctor who, where to replace the actor they have the main character "regenerate". I know they still have an explanation in Bond leaving and a new agent being brought in under his codename, but it almost feels like the end of an era.
Sorry for the long-winded message, I was just reading about this this morning and wanted to throw in my two cents.
One of my favorite Bond moments was when M said straight to Bond's face "I think you're a sexist, misogynst dinosaur, a relic of the cold war." I thought "Oh shit, they just called him out for what he is! Maybe this'll be new!" --... but then he just kinda went on being Bond.
The latest ones have all felt like he's been sleepwalking through the stories. Wonderful, hypnotic production value, but otherwise meh. I could easily see it needing a good flip on its head.
The lens shifted though. Instead of showing his being Bond as a "Women want him, men want to be him!" escapist adventure romp, it became darker and he seems much more tortured and less aspirational than in the previous iterations (Timothy Dalton exempted).
Basically they turned him into a rich Spike Spiegel.
I’m a bond fan since Roger Moore. I can’t think of anything about 007 that’s incompatible with the female genre. My only disappointment is knowing how awesome Idris Elba would be. The guy fits the role like a glove.
Anyway, could you elaborate on your position?
If the main character isn't James Bond then it's not a James Bond film.
From what I've read it looks like Craig's bond is still the lead role in the movie, but he's called out of retirement and Lynch's character is the agent who has taken on the 007 codename.
Sounds like a Bond film to me.
That sounds like a best case scenario to me!! Hopefully it's better than Star Wars' most recent attempt at a coming-out-retirement narrative.
I suspect it's a "passing the torch" film to transition the series.
I have to disagree. The movies are much more about 007 the agent than James Bond the man. Aside from some of the newer movies and the original books, Bond's origin story and life outside of MI6 is pretty much untouched by the films. I am excited for the post-Bond 007 era. To me it's a way to keep the series fresh and not have this weird reality-bending unaging iterative timeline where Bond is always roughly the same age for decades on end.
My god, did any of you RTFA?
I'm disappointed in tildes. I thought we were better here.
For those of you who are only here for the comments, Lynch is adopting the 007 codename, and is NOT portraying another "Bond". James Bond is still set to be a character in this film. Seems a lot of you are worried that she was actually playing as James Bond.
The influx of invites has begun...
I'd have to double check but I'm almost certain that more than half of the movies are not based on Fleming's books at this point. Also let's be honest, how many people who know about Bond have ever read the books which are, as you imply, not even very good.
Having a female MI6 agent in 2019 isn't "shoehorning diversity" into anything. It's just how the world is now (and how it should have been all along, really). Bond hasn't been stuck in the 60s for quite some time.
btw, Charlie Higson's Young Bond books are far superior to Fleming's work and well worth a read.
If you don't like the character, why do you care who plays it?
The issue is not who plays the character of Bond (still Daniel Craig) but the fact that the whole series is misogynistic at basically every turn and only exists for anti-Soviet propaganda value.
I am inclined to agree. If Bond just isn't reconcilable with modern values and attitudes (not even in a way that clearly casts his chauvinism in a negative light), then so-be-it, but if so then I think it's far better to simply call it time on the character than to try and give the franchise a woke paint-job.
For a few years now I've thought that Zöe Bell would make a great 007-like agent. She that perfect balance between 'tough girl' that still remains extremely feminine. She's also fun and funny -- which is key -- while still maintaining a 'cool' aesthetic.
For me, as much as I like Bond as a series, asethetically, Mission: Impossible has produced better films both in excitement and franchise consistency. M:I also has more wiggle room and isn't held back by the legacy of Bond -- which is a strength. They haven't really branched out a lot, but if they decided to, there wouldn't be any rioting.
For males, I was really hoping that they'd go with Tom Hardy or Idris Elba and cast Nikolaj Coster-Waldau as the big bad.