007 is now a woman

[DamnYanks2]

Re: 007 is now a woman

Agreed. Hollywood is too lazy to write new ideas these days.

God they are. But if the classics sell. Who can blame them right? $$

Sent from my SM-J337VPP using Tapatalk

[TheShizNo1]

Re: 007 is now a woman

I don't see it being lazy if you're going where the money is.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Operation Sports mobile app

[SmashMan]

Re: 007 is now a woman

That's basically how I feel. Would we really be cool if Spiderman became Spiderwoman? Or Batman became Batwoman.Little Mermaid became the little Merman. You get the point.

I guess my counter question to that is, why does the existence of a Spider-Man mean there can't also be a Spider-Woman version at some point? Or yeah, a Little Merman? Not something I'd necessarily see, but I've got no problems if they were ever made.

I think that's where a lot of the difference in conversation lies here: some see it as a character becoming a new one (thus the original being replaced) and others see it as an additional version of a character (acting as a complement to the original).

[DamnYanks2]

Re: 007 is now a woman

I guess my counter question to that is, why does the existence of a Spider-Man mean there can't also be a Spider-Woman version at some point? Or yeah, a Little Merman? Not something I'd necessarily see, but I've got no problems if they were ever made.



I think that's where a lot of the difference in conversation lies here: some see it as a character becoming a new one (thus the original being replaced) and others see it as an additional version of a character (acting as a complement to the original).

Because that would just be weird man. That may not be a sophisticated answer. But that's my first thought. What if Princess Leia became Prince Leia.

I understand they deviate from the original story but don't go that far.



Sent from my SM-J337VPP using Tapatalk

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: 007 is now a woman

The issue is not with females or minorities being cast, it's about remakes and characters being changed from what they were. It's about taking classic movies and changing then into something unrecognizable just for "progress" instead of actually making new and good material where the focus is on the story rather than an agenda.

My hangup when I see people complaining about this stuff is the first and often times only complaint is regarding the cast. When pressed they'll throw out the "I just hate all remakes" as a falling back point, but when they start off by bitching about the differences in characters and casting then it comes off as disingenuous. It's compounded by the fact that a lot of these "PC casting" decisions have little impact on the actual character or their narrative. Once again it comes back to the difference in cast. So you dislike remakes, but want them to stay the same as their original? Ok then.

Regardless, they aren't removing those classic movies. They still exist and are easy to find. Their influence is not lessened and their legacy isn't dragged through the mud.

Would we really be cool if Spiderman became Spiderwoman? Or Batman became Batwoman.Little Mermaid became the little Merman. You get the point.


If its authentic and not forced I'm down with it. Stranger things, Game of thrones, Tomb raider all have strong female lead roles and I loved them.

That's all.

We've already answered your first question. Yes, we are cool with having a Spider-Woman and a Batwoman as evidenced by the characters already existing.

Lara Croft was created as a direct opposite to Indiana Jones to be "more original". Is that not considered a PC decision?

[DamnYanks2]

Re: 007 is now a woman

My hangup when I see people complaining about this stuff is the first and often times only complaint is regarding the cast. When pressed they'll throw out the "I just hate all remakes" as a falling back point, but when they start off by bitching about the differences in characters and casting then it comes off as disingenuous. It's compounded by the fact that a lot of these "PC casting" decisions have little impact on the actual character or their narrative. Once again it comes back to the difference in cast. So you dislike remakes, but want them to stay the same as their original? Ok then.



Regardless, they aren't removing those classic movies. They still exist and are easy to find. Their influence is not lessened and their legacy isn't dragged through the mud.







We've already answered your first question. Yes, we are cool with having a Spider-Woman and a Batwoman as evidenced by the characters already existing.



Lara Croft was created as a direct opposite to Indiana Jones to be "more original". Is that not considered a PC decision?

I meant in place of the original Batman and Spiderman.

Didn't know that about Lara Croft though. That's interesting.

Sent from my SM-J337VPP using Tapatalk

[Blzer]

Re: 007 is now a woman

Lara Croft was created as a direct opposite to Indiana Jones to be "more original". Is that not considered a PC decision?

Fair or not, I think the time when it originated is important for this. She was created in a time where there wasn't a massive influx of politically correct individuals with the vocal power they have now, thanks to whatever you want to point to (though social media and the internet as a whole is a good outlet now that didn't exist at one time), as if her identity was a response to something bigger going on in those times. So no, I don't think she qualifies.

Less fairly so, if she was created today regardless of one's intent with her, many people won't be able to wrap their head around anything other than "being PC." That is, for me, unless the character couldn't be written any other way based on its story, and the story is one worth telling.

Even when Tarantino wrote and shot both parts of Kill Bill, yes he wanted someone for young females to look up to in an empowering role, but it wasn't in lieu of some greater good trying to be served through our culture or the political climate. Uma just fit the bill (pun intended) of a warrior emblem, and she was likely cast in light of Tarantino's vision in general (like it was written for her). Not to mention, of course, the story has purpose centralizing around a female character.

[kingkilla56]

Re: 007 is now a woman

These movie studios really know how to play some of you guys like a fiddle.

And when the movie releases, and it’s solid and you have nothing to really be that upset about, you’ll just hope everyone forgets how ridiculous you sounded in July 2019.

I’m old enough to remember when some wanted to protest the streets when Bond became a Blonde.

I was here when some of you same guys were raging when you were yelling “that’s not my Mary Jane!”

Just stop it and wait till the movie is released.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: 007 is now a woman

Comic book guy popping in to say there IS a Spider-Woman and Batwoman. Several actually. One of the Spider-Women is Asian. Batwoman is gay.

But that isn't the point of the thread. Carry on. Everyone knows my thoughts on fictional characters.

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: 007 is now a woman

How is Lara Croft not considered a PC invention when she was created EXACTLY the same way a lot of people here seem to envision PC decisions being made?

And perhaps I'm misreading you Blzer (frankly I've been trying to figure out what the hell you've been trying to say this whole thread haha), but you're saying it's only considered PC when these traditionally under and misrepresented people have a slightly louder voice? I'm not sure I follow because the power and controls of the industry hasn't shifted very much.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: 007 is now a woman

Nvm, the important part of that post is the second paragraph, and I agree. It's definitely in the audiences head and has little to do with the writers.

[Blzer]

Re: 007 is now a woman

1) I don't know who Phoebe Waller-Bridge is. I'm guessing she came in for the new Bond, you're saying?

2) I'm not putting much stock into what gender is responsible for the on-screen character in writing form.

3) My point with Tarantino is that the female empowerment is an unintended reward of the story he wrote. It's a plus that it happens to work with what he wanted to do. I doubt he went to his keyboard first by thinking: "Hey, I want to provide something that young girls could idolize."

4) A lot of what I believe the current movement is representative of is nothing more than the times. Even Merida in Brave and Rey in Star Wars, in my opinion, came just before the spawning of everything else that has been "female for female's sake" or "non-white for non-white's sake," or whatever we're talking about here. And yes, I did say movement. I can barely fathom the Oscars now because every speech is about something that has nothing to do with their film, so they can just use it as a podium for something else (even if they're right).

- - - - - - - - - - -

I like my cinema to be about story and characters first. Almost none of me cares whatsoever about who it's speaking larger to, and when things happen as a result of that only and sacrifice story or character as a result, that's where my line draws. I give the film a chance though, especially if it's not promoted for the "wrong reasons" in my book. That's where I stand. Get me into the film's universe, don't take me out of it so you can serve an agenda (again, nothing to do with race or gender, but everything to do with intent).

We don't know how this Bond film will pan out. For all we know, it could be the best one and this could be the perfect direction. I just hope they're doing it without any other ulterior motives, though. Look at the recent Batwoman trailer, and tell me that they're doing this for reasons other than to continue pushing the movement (and I adore Ruby Rose).

As one more side example, race, gender, and orientation belonging to story are fine if that's the intent of the story itself. Look at Lakeview Terrace and Love, Simon (unfortunately, one of those two movies wasn't very good).

Anyway, I'll try and stick to Bond the rest of the way here. I'm okay with the decision insofar, though I am a bit perplexed by taking the 007 codename, as well as personally wishing Eve Moneypenny was back in the field like at the beginning of Skyfall.

Keep in mind that Boyle left for creative differences, by the way. Maybe he came up with a good story, and Broccoli was like: "Nope, needs a female," and he parts not because of the female aspect, but because their vision was one-dimensional and his strong excuse for a story couldn't include an extra character, male or female. Or, maybe it's because they wanted Bond to die and he wanted Bond to live. I don't really know what it was. Something did happen there, though... and this could be symbolic of that.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: 007 is now a woman

In some circles, Moneypenny being given a first name and being in the field generate this level of uproar. The internet is a beautiful place.

[Caulfield]

Re: 007 is now a woman

I don't see it being lazy if you're going where the money is.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Operation Sports mobile app

Yep, thats not lazy. Thats just being whorish.

[p_rushing]

Re: 007 is now a woman

That's basically how I feel. Would we really be cool if Spiderman became Spiderwoman? Or Batman became Batwoman.Little Mermaid became the little Merman. You get the point.

People may disagree with me. But there have been multiple movies butchered because they wanted to force a narrative that wasn't necessary.

Nobody is arguing a movie can't just suck on it's own.

If its authentic and not forced I'm down with it. Stranger things, Game of thrones, Tomb raider all have strong female lead roles and I loved them.

That's all.



Sent from my SM-J337VPP using Tapatalk

That isn't the same at all though. You are comparing 2 different characters that exist.

If Spiderman was played by a woman and had the same story, then that would be doing something purely for PC reasons. Creating a Spiderwoman character and story is different. They still may be doing it for PC reasons but it doesn't matter as they are creating an original character. You aren't creating a Spiderman story and then putting her as the lead.


This all comes down to how they wrote this character. They made her 007, in a James Bond movie. It still has Bond in it to get his fans to watch the money. Write her own character and let her stand on her own, don't write her to be Bond.

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk