It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I agree, what it would be nonsense is pretending that Bond will retire and that woman would become the next 007 near the end. As for the other, I'm not bothered if for a while someone else is 007 while Bond is out at the beginning of the film. But it would only work if that other 007 is KIA and someone else is brought to replace him/her, à la Forever And A Day.
Thank you. The only ones who want it otherwise are #MeToo and apparently fans on here who think it's a clever gimmick, uh idea... to create a "really well written female 007 agent." You know because that's not creating and walking into a feminist line of fire unnecessarily.
It's not damaging to the character James Bond, but that doesn't make it a great idea either. What is so interesting about it? "Woman" is not a character. Are you so taken with it's "cleverness" or "freshness" that you think it means it's a good idea? It's a gimmick idea that baits #MeToo whether you like that fact or not.
Do I look like I give a damn?
Exactly what I think. On the bright side, credits could be very funny :D
"Albert R. Broccoli's EON Productions presents Daniel Craig as Ian Fleming's James Bond (old 007) in _______________ . Starring ? as Young Girl (new 007), Léa Seydoux, Rami Malek with Billy Magnussen and Ralph Fiennes as M"
Also I don’t give a hoot if Anthony Horowitz wrote a prequel to Casino Royale and there’s another 007. That’s not what Fleming wrote.
Imagine what the reaction would be if they made Moneypenny a field agent or made the Quartermaster a preppy, hipster nerd.
Oh wait.
Didn't like those either. Or Bond being blonde. But hey, I know, I get your point.
Well, whatever they do with the character, it's Craig's last entry as Bond, and all of his entries have been different one way or another. So it's safe to say this one will be polemical on its own merit. That being said, they can always readjust it all from Bond26 onwards. Who knows what's on their minds?
It felt forced, a bit like Robin in TDKR. Something cringeworthy for me. I even thought it was lazy writing, a pish posh idea that only worked because SF is otherwise brilliant, plot holes and everything.
You’re an excellent barometer for bad ideas. I hope Eon sees this and runs everything by you in the future.
Thing is anyone can put a spin on James Bond but how much does it become what Fleming intended and his character. Then what somebody else wants the character All I ask is they stick to Fleming because he never wrote that it's not Anthony's Character it's Fleming's and it should always be that way. Just my two cents. I know Fleming isn't alive anymore but to keep his spirit going and stay true to his character. You can change the world around Bond but you can't change Bond just my opinion.
2. I don't care about Fleming's Bond. Never did. I am a cinematic Bond fan. It's time for Fleming acolytes to accept that not only does cinematic Bond now stands on it's own, it has been far bigger than Fleming's Bond for a long time.
1) "he stopped being 007 sometime after the books" - WHAT?! No, really, wait. What?
2)"Not that it really matters what Fleming wrote,..." - This killed it for me. Must go away for awhile, don't want to risk the truces ;)
3) "this is the cinematic Bond" - Doesn't he mean the Broccoli Bond show he despises so much?
4) I'm out. Don't like the rumours, don't like the reactions. Someone today answered me that Chivalry being dead was a good thing because you shouldn't have to admit knowing how people wanted to be treated. I don't identify with the current culture anymore. This is just too sick. Univex out, before I get depressed again.
You all do know that the MeToo movement is a movement against sexual assault and sexual harassment? (Something that concerns both women and men.) Okay, then... So what on earth are you on about in examples below (and others similar)?
What is "a MeToo situation" with a Bond movie that people are worried about? What is "a MeToo film"?
Of course "strong female characters and #MeToo are not mutually exclusive" - I'm amazed that even needs saying, and now I wonder where someone said they are, I must have missed that when glancing through the comments... and if indeed some morons at some tabloids write something suggesting that those are mutually exclusive then that just further proves that reading tabloids is a complete waste of time. Strong female characters and MeToo are two completely unrelated things, so they can occur both together or separately.
First of all, feminism and MeToo are very different things (though I imagine feminism was necessary to have existed first for there ever to appear any sort of wide/significant MeToo). But what even is "baiting #MeToo"? And, um, you seem to be saying that having a specific female character in a movie would be baiting the movement against sexual abuse, incurring the wrath of... of people who've been sexually abused and/or of feminists? What???
"Again"? I believe it's actually the first movement that really has "shined a big light on the subject" of sexual assault and sexual harassment, and about time, too, that it has been talked about much more - perhaps things will truly improve eventually as a result of that. But it's not like the subject has been discussed all that much before, certainly not to the same extent, so it's hardly "again" - but naturally sexual abuse is "nothing new."
Like has already been pointed out by some people here, what does MeToo have to do with modern Bond? There haven't been any actual issues on that front in any recent Bond movies, have there, so what the heck?
I personally am not mad on them either, but that's more down to Mendes' execution rather than concept. Neither of them, on paper, are any more drastic than what is being proposed above. And certainly, none warrant the lazy laying out of years old, half baked jibes of "this will destroy James Bond". It could be the biggest load of crap ever, and it still wouldn't destroy James Bond.
Speaking generally, if you're expecting the Bond of old, this film is likely not going to be for you. It may or may not turn out to be an excellent action adventure. that features Daniel Craig's version of James Bond, consistent with the four films that proceeded it. I doubt it will change the minds of anyone who already has their grievances with the last 10 years.
And as you say, @Univex, Bond 26 will probably be more to the taste of those who hate what they're hearing now.
I really do feel that the last few pages are a rather damning indictment of some members' ability/inability to resist sensationalist headlines and newspaper rhetoric, though.