Movie News/Discussion Thread 2

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Moggy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:09 pm

myrrh heat than light wrote:Probably opening a can of worms here, but...

I'd consider myself a feminist but I think this (and Ghostbusters) are going about things the wrong way. I want to see strong female characters in films, and I want to see more ethnic minorities in cinema too. But rebooting existing franchises by recasting the characters with females is just stupid. I don't want to see Debbie Ocean just as I don't want to see Larry Croft or Alan Ripley. I don't want a black James Bond either.

These are existing characters and they're being changed because of no other reason than to cash in on the 'Hollywood is sexist' train. I can just imagine the pitch for this (probably delivered by a guy), 'it's Oceans Eleven - but with girls!' That, I'm afraid, is the definition of discrimination.

Mad Max: Fury Road and The Hunger Games movies proved that films can deliver strong female roles without resorting to gender recasting. I hope this fails, as I suspect it will.

Yeah I know, bumpain white guy etc.


I think it all depends on what the IP is.

A black James Bond? I can see that this would mess up the existing canon but I am not against it as such. They should have avoided showing the ancestral home of the Bond’s in Skyfall and gone with the “James Bond is a codename” idea. Either way the character changes every few years, I see no real reason why Bond has to be white.

A female Dr Who? It’s a show about a regenerating alien. I see no problem with the sex of the character changing.

A female Ghostbusters? It could have worked with a decent script and less “remember this from the original!!!!!!” bullshit. A comedy about a team of people catching ghosts isn’t restricted to one sex or the other. I agree though that they should have concentrated on delivering a decent movie rather than just swapping genders and thinking that would make an interesting film.

Female Ocean’s? Meh, Ocean’s 11 was decent but the sequels were strawberry floating awful. I couldn’t care less what a new Ocean’s film is about or who is in it.

Because of you though, I really do now want to see a movie where Larry Croft is searching the galaxy for an ancient artefact, while helped out by his sidekick Alan Ripley. ;)

Image
User avatar
Skippy
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Skippy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:16 pm

Partridge Iciclebubbles wrote:They should have avoided showing the ancestral home of the Bond’s in Skyfall and gone with the “James Bond is a codename” idea.


I've never despised a fan theory more than the "James Bond is a codename" theory

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Moggy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:21 pm

Skippy wrote:
Partridge Iciclebubbles wrote:They should have avoided showing the ancestral home of the Bond’s in Skyfall and gone with the “James Bond is a codename” idea.


I've never despised a fan theory more than the "James Bond is a codename" theory


Good for you.

It makes far more sense than the idea that this bloke has been wandering around the world for over 50 years, using his real name and changing his face/accent/height during all that time. It also opens it up to any actor being able to play the role without the bullshit “Noooo BOND IS WHITE!!!” comments.

Edit:

It was also sort of there when Lazenby took over. His first words were "this never happened to the other guy!", which instantly opened up the idea that James Bond was never an actual person.

Image
User avatar
more heat than light
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by more heat than light » Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:39 pm

But James Bond is a white guy. That's the actual character. I don't see any difference between saying that and moaning about Jake Gyllenhall playing the Prince Of Persia or Tom Cruise being a samurai.

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
Preezy
Skeletor
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Preezy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:43 pm

Surely 007 is the ongoing codename, not James Bond?

Otherwise how do you factor 006/Alec Trevelyan? Is that also just a codename and Sean Bean was just one in a long line of Alec Trevelyans? What a stupid codename that would be, it's really hard to spell.

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Moggy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:00 pm

myrrh heat than light wrote:But James Bond is a white guy. That's the actual character. I don't see any difference between saying that and moaning about Jake Gyllenhall playing the Prince Of Persia or Tom Cruise being a samurai.


Tom Cruise wasn’t a samurai.

Gyllenhall playing a Prince of Persia 1000+ plus years ago obviously makes no sense.

A black guy playing a spy in modern Britain makes sense.

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Moggy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:02 pm

Preezy wrote:Surely 007 is the ongoing codename, not James Bond?

Otherwise how do you factor 006/Alec Trevelyan? Is that also just a codename and Sean Bean was just one in a long line of Alec Trevelyans? What a stupid codename that would be, it's really hard to spell.


You think spies wander around the world telling everyone their real names?

Imagine in 1942, Roger Harrison is deep under cover in Nazi Germany and during his meeting with Himmler he says “the names Harrison old boy, Roger Harrison”.

Image
User avatar
more heat than light
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by more heat than light » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:12 pm

Partridge Iciclebubbles wrote:
myrrh heat than light wrote:But James Bond is a white guy. That's the actual character. I don't see any difference between saying that and moaning about Jake Gyllenhall playing the Prince Of Persia or Tom Cruise being a samurai.


Tom Cruise wasn’t a samurai.

Gyllenhall playing a Prince of Persia 1000+ plus years ago obviously makes no sense.

A black guy playing a spy in modern Britain makes sense.


Yeah ok, my examples weren't the best. I meant the criticisms of whitewashing in Hollywood. The answer isn't to make all of the existing characters black, it's to find and create new exciting roles for these actors.

A black guy playing a spy in modern Britain makes sense, totally. I just don't think it needs to be James Bond. Maybe a spin-off with someone playing a different agent, 009 perhaps. Like 24 Legacy, only good.

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Moggy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:21 pm

myrrh heat than light wrote:
Partridge Iciclebubbles wrote:
myrrh heat than light wrote:But James Bond is a white guy. That's the actual character. I don't see any difference between saying that and moaning about Jake Gyllenhall playing the Prince Of Persia or Tom Cruise being a samurai.


Tom Cruise wasn’t a samurai.

Gyllenhall playing a Prince of Persia 1000+ plus years ago obviously makes no sense.

A black guy playing a spy in modern Britain makes sense.


Yeah ok, my examples weren't the best. I meant the criticisms of whitewashing in Hollywood. The answer isn't to make all of the existing characters black, it's to find and create new exciting roles for these actors.

A black guy playing a spy in modern Britain makes sense, totally. I just don't think it needs to be James Bond. Maybe a spin-off with someone playing a different agent, 009 perhaps. Like 24 Legacy, only good.


I certainly wouldn’t support making all existing characters black.

Bond is somewhat different though. He’s a massive phenomenon that no spin off could ever match. But his only really characteristics (in the movies at least!) are spying, drinking, gambling and strawberry floating. There’s no real reason he couldn’t be played by somebody of a different race. Sort of like a more famous (at the time anyway) Nick Fury. There was no reason that Fury’s character had to stay white.

Whitewashing is a problem in some cases and a non-issue in others. Gyllenhall is a good example of whitewashing for instance, whereas Cruise in the Last Samurai made sense. I’d look at white roles being changed in the same way, does it make sense?

Image
User avatar
Preezy
Skeletor
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Preezy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:22 pm

We should have a Chinese James Bond.

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Moggy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:31 pm

Preezy wrote:We should have a Chinese James Bond.


Image

Image
User avatar
more heat than light
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by more heat than light » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:32 pm

Preezy wrote:We should have a Chinese James Bond.


:lol:

I kinda hate being on this side of the argument, I'm usually incredibly liberal and this does make me feel like I'm turning into one of 'them'. I think I'll leave it there, I think I'll just end up digging myself into a hole I can't escape from. Good arguments Moggy, well fought. :-)

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Moggy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:33 pm

myrrh heat than light wrote:
Preezy wrote:We should have a Chinese James Bond.


:lol:

I kinda hate being on this side of the argument, I'm usually incredibly liberal and this does make me feel like I'm turning into one of 'them'. I think I'll leave it there, I think I'll just end up digging myself into a hole I can't escape from. Good arguments Moggy, well fought. :-)


You went from incredibly liberal into a screaming member of the alt-right.

I blame the achievements.

;)

Image
User avatar
more heat than light
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Leicestershire

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by more heat than light » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:38 pm

Image

jawafour wrote:You definitely have the biggest one, mhtl - it's strawberry-floatin' massive!
User avatar
Skippy
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Skippy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 7:24 pm

Partridge Iciclebubbles wrote:
Skippy wrote:
Partridge Iciclebubbles wrote:They should have avoided showing the ancestral home of the Bond’s in Skyfall and gone with the “James Bond is a codename” idea.


I've never despised a fan theory more than the "James Bond is a codename" theory


Good for you.

It makes far more sense than the idea that this bloke has been wandering around the world for over 50 years, using his real name and changing his face/accent/height during all that time. It also opens it up to any actor being able to play the role without the bullshit “Noooo BOND IS WHITE!!!” comments.

Edit:

It was also sort of there when Lazenby took over. His first words were "this never happened to the other guy!", which instantly opened up the idea that James Bond was never an actual person.


That, or the James Bond series isn't a strict, single narrative that needs to have flawless logic. Instead it's a string of largely episodic stories about a small cast of characters that move and change with the times. It's episodic, an anthology series in some respects, it plays loosely with its structure and that's exactly how it's been able to go for 55 years. It is not telling a single, logical story with 24 chapters, and that's what the people who buy into the codename theory refuse to or cannot understand.

Plus Bond doesn't have to be white. His character is a privelleged arsehole which, yeah is easier to sell with a white guy but it doesn't have to be in 2017.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Moggy » Wed Dec 20, 2017 7:57 pm

Skippy wrote:
That, or the James Bond series isn't a strict, single narrative that needs to have flawless logic. Instead it's a string of largely episodic stories about a small cast of characters that move and change with the times. It's episodic, an anthology series in some respects, it plays loosely with its structure and that's exactly how it's been able to go for 55 years. It is not telling a single, logical story with 24 chapters, and that's what the people who buy into the codename theory refuse to or cannot understand.


Bond has never been an anthology series though. The Connery films were referred to by Lazenby, Moore visited the grave of the wife of Lazenby, etc. The Daniel Craig era kind of stood alone, until Skyfall when they referred back to the older films.

It doesn't have to be a single, logical story, of course not. But it certainly can all be linked together by easily and simply just making the name a codename. Which also makes perfect sense, why would a superspy be jetting around the world telling all the villains his real name? That's what people that hate the codename theory refuse or cannot understand.

Image
User avatar
Preezy
Skeletor
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Preezy » Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:54 am

Sicario 2: Soldado trailer is out, looks badass :datass:


Image
User avatar
Tafdolphin
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Tafdolphin » Thu Dec 21, 2017 8:14 am

Looks straight to DVD.

Goat wrote:Guy probably decided not to show up because he heard Taffy was a Cow-exploding fantasist mentalist.

Bloggy blog blog blog.
Newsletter!
User avatar
Preezy
Skeletor
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Preezy » Thu Dec 21, 2017 8:50 am

Rudolphin wrote:Looks straight to DVD.

Image

Image
User avatar
Parksey
Moderator
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Movie News/Discussion Thread 2
by Parksey » Thu Dec 21, 2017 9:36 am

Yeah the "Bond is a codename" theory is a bit gooseberry fool. I don't know why you need to try and tie in 24 movies that clearly weren't ever meant to be tied together.

And that it makes more sense that MI5 would just pick people with the exact same personality tropes and give them the same codename over 50-odd years. Bond is a character, not a canon. They link together in various ways and usually the same actor's "series" are a collective whole, but really each movie is almost a stand alone adventure featuring the character of James Bond.

I can't see what he has to be white also. MHTL said that "James Bond was white" but where has that been stated? I've read most of the books and can't remember it in any description (not that this would be a legitimate reason anyway). If you audition for the role, and the best candidate is black, cast him. His personality traits aren't dependent or affected by skin colour. He's an arrogant, selfish, mmasochistic, destructive prick. I don't think they are things dictated by the colour of your skin.

Besides, Fleming himself altered bits of Bond to match Connery's portrayal. The character is pretty fluid(not literallt, - you couldn't cast a bottle of 7UP in the role for example).


Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Blue Eyes, Finish.Last, Frank, Google [Bot], Green Gecko, Kanbei, KK, Mafrozen, Met, Minty14, Outrunner, Red 5 stella, Return_of_the_STAR, Rhubarb, Skarjo, Yahoo [Bot] and 61 guests