For that matter, does it count if you kill at least 2 people before becoming an agent? IIRC, in the books Bond was in the Special Boat Service before being 007, could have killed a fair few people serving there.Hawki said:
First Ariel, now 007 is casted with a Black Female Actress. (Craig is still James Bond)
- Thread starter Samtemdo8_v1legacy
- Start date
I could dig that. As you say, Spectre gave Bond a good reason to leave the game, so him training a successor is a good way to end his chapter, one that both honors Bond's role while paving the way for a new 007.Gordon_4 said:
Because I DO care about what people prioritize in this modern age. Like, personally, I WANT to complain about this stuff too, not because I don't want diversity in media, I just want things to stay true to the core source material, but I bother less and less because as long as human rights are being violated, complaining about this stuff is less important, and it just validates bigots anyways.Hawki said:
Basically, the part I do care about, is that until things get better in reality, then complaining about well-intentioned media mistakes is a misdirection.
Why is it even news when "OMG a black person did something" or "omg it was a WOMAN!!" in the first place? Seriously, they would not make a woman play " James Bond" but they very well could make a woman agent with the same characteristics. James bond makes women seem disposable, why would it be any different if a woman makes the men seem disposable? I am not seeing the issue of having a woman, black or otherwise treat men the same way Bond treat's women or why that should bother or outrage anyone in the first place.Samtemdo8 said:
Only men are allowed to portray "power fantasies" or something? WTH do they think Beyonce has been doing? The story may even be more interesting as a woman. I have no idea why people get their undies in a wad over allowing different perspectives to be shown.
No offense OP but your title got me cracking up. It sounds like some hysteria on some red scare variety.
FIRST ARIEL NOW BOND WHO WILL THEY BLACK UP NEXT!?!?!!!! DUN DUN DUN!!!!!!!!!!!!
Personal let the "woke" agenda or whatever you want to call it flourish I want to see how this plays out both as a movie and internet losing their shit.
FIRST ARIEL NOW BOND WHO WILL THEY BLACK UP NEXT!?!?!!!! DUN DUN DUN!!!!!!!!!!!!
Personal let the "woke" agenda or whatever you want to call it flourish I want to see how this plays out both as a movie and internet losing their shit.
Black woman as 007? No problem.
But I might prefer James Bond to stay as a white man.
But I might prefer James Bond to stay as a white man.
Whatever point you might have wanted to express, the minute you chucked that pejorative in there you signalled that debate would be wasted effort.Eacaraxe said:
I hear this accusation so often, yet the only times I've seen those kind of terms brought up it's in response to "criticisms" focusing solely on the demography of the characters.Eacaraxe said:
Take Dr. Who. The quality of writing has been dross since Tennant, but as soon as the Doctor is a woman-- despite this being totally internally consistent with the in-universe rules-- then the criticism reaches a fever pitch and focuses almost exclusively on that.
That is identity politics to an extreme.
Do you genuinely believe people in significant numbers actually actively consume media because they get accused of prejudice if they don't?
That doesn't happen. That's just complete nonsense.
It does come across as some severe racist and sexist hysteria tbh. Like OMAAGAWD they are letting black people and women ruin everything, why can't they just let white males peepholes keep their powertrippin white and male and keep all the others away from our sexist, racist fantasies. Seriously this is some whiny BS here at the highest level. And people wonder why we actually need to continue to work on equality... it is like some day we might actually get to the point that they can have all races, sexes and genders play different roles and people do not bat an eyelash over it. This thread's existence however only goes to show we are far from being there yet.Jarrito3001 said:
Yea I see that the complaints about both Dr.Who and Star Trek are completely unfounded. Star Trek has always had characters of all races and sexes and I honestly have no idea how people can attempt to claim they are putting people in certain roles just for the sake of diversity when in reality Star Trek has always had females in leadership roles, even if they were not always human in the earliest years. Star Trek has a long history of this and it is far from being new or something to be "outraged" about.Silvanus said:
What even is the point of making a James Bond movie if you're gonna strip it of everything that makes it a James Bond movie.
The same point that people are constantly trying to make Star Wars stories without the Jedi or the Sith.Johnny Novgorod said:
I personally think the Jedi and the Sith are the coolest part of the IP, but over time there comes so much Lore or surrounding addition to the world that is created that people get interested in other aspects of said world.
That's why Spin-Offs are a thing. I don't have to like a Spin-Off. And in fact, there are few I do. But I can understand why people are interested in the other workings of MI-6 in this Supervillian plagued Reality in the Bondverse and would want to see other aspects of it.
Yes, I know I am in the minority, but I really loved the Ewoks as a kid and would be perfectly content with Ewok movies without any Jedi or Sith and just have Ewoks because Ewoks are awesome. I actually made an Endor scene once with my Ewok action figures that had custom realistic tree houses, landscaping and forest that was pretty bad ass. I had accumulated a good number of naked Ewoks as well and made them custom clothing, tools and weapons too. I wound up giving it to my nephew as a birthday gift one year because he was so crazy about it and would play with it every time he came over.I figured it would be better for someone to enjoy it and use it who appreciated it rather than just sit there and collect dust for me to look at.ObsidianJones said:
.. and there I go trailing off topic again... XD
Why does having a black lady use the 007 designation automatically mean that it isn't going to be a movie about a psychopathic alcoholic murderer shooting their way through world domination plots using outlandish gadgets and bedding every 4th person they interact with?Johnny Novgorod said:
I mean, I love me some Bond movies, but let's be real: a North Korean getting gene therapy to look like a white dude to sell conflict diamonds to fund a solar death laser to cut a path through the DMZ so North Korea can invade South Korea is not made more ridiculous if 007 is a black lady instead of a white dude.
We honestly still don't even know what the movie is going to be about, so I think that's jumping to conclusions. Unless this black female 007 is gonna be sitting at home knitting sweaters for her cat instead of getting in shoot-outs, using gadgets, and traveling around the world I doubt it'll get stripped of everything that makes it a Bond movie.Johnny Novgorod said:
And considering how many movies we've had (isn't it like 40 or something) and how James Bond has kind of had its spotlight taken by other movies, I don't think a shake-up would be unwarranted.
And the only fun James Bond was Roger Moore.trunkage said:
Woman... It's always been about the Wookies and the Twi'leks. We had the ultimate Buddy team-up with Mission [https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Mission_Vao] and Zaalbar [https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Zaalbar]!Lil devils x said:Yes, I know I am in the minority, but I really loved the Ewoks as a kid and would be perfectly content with Ewok movies without any Jedi or Sith and just have Ewoks because Ewoks are awesome. I actually made an Endor scene once with my Ewok action figures that had custom realistic tree houses, landscaping and forest that was pretty bad ass. I had accumulated a good number of naked Ewoks as well and made them custom clothing, tools and weapons too. I wound up giving it to my nephew as a birthday gift one year because he was so crazy about it and would play with it every time he came over.I figured it would be better for someone to enjoy it and use it who appreciated it rather than just sit there and collect dust for me to look at.
.. and there I go trailing off topic again... XD
I think there was a Sith Lord somewhere in that, but I can't remember...
Lies and Misdirection [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoWexi-DWFQ].Casual Shinji said:
Excuse the girl comment. 90's were a different time.
I also think that's missing the point. I've never been a fan of stretching self-contained stories into "universes" or whatever they call them for the sake of marketing. Didn't like the Lucas prequels, don't like Disney's happy meals. It's all just wheels spinning. And for that matter I don't like Craig (he's a bore) or his era past Casino Royale either. Connery and Brosnan remain the best.ObsidianJones said:
Look, I'm Latino. Put Diego Luna or Salma Hayek as the new 007, I still think it's pandering.
Oh my god, I'd forgotten that stupid fucking thing existed. All I needed to hear was 'Bond.. James Bond Jr.' and the memories came flooding back.ObsidianJones said:
I don't question the ability of WB (is it WB?) to come up with ridiculous action plots, I question the point of dethroning Bond as 007. It's just a pandering move that exists outside the diegesis of the movie to get woke cred and I can so obviously see through it. In real life I'm 100% for the notion that anybody can be anything (woot!) but when you're creating a [fictional] character you're explicitly dictating what that character is and isn't. You make choices on who they are, how they think, where they come from, what they look like. You make it all up and you pick every detail for a reason or else why would you?Casual Shinji said: