Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 07-16-2019, 12:48 PM
Death of Rats is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: A Humid Oven
Posts: 3,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
Agent 014 might not have had a LTK, but he was "twice as good as 007".
At least, that is his line to the barflys at the Airport Ramada bar at last call.
__________________
SQUEAK!
  #152  
Old 07-16-2019, 01:17 PM
carrps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by psychonaut View Post
Given that Bond is British, I rather think you mean David Mitchell. And I would gladly pay double the admission price to see Mitchell as 007.
Gosh, I thought you meant David Mitchell the writer of whom I'm doing a reading blitz (heh) right now.
  #153  
Old 07-16-2019, 03:30 PM
ShadowFacts is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
What are some other things that Pheobe Waller-Bridge has written, so we can compare?

I'll admit, I don't usually pay much attention to the writers for TV shows and movies.
Fleabag, which is about as far from James Bond as you can possibly get, but is one of my top 3 shows of the last 5 years, if not my favorite. It's hard to get how amazing it is in clip form, but here's a trailer.

Killing Eve is spy/action-oriented and would give you a better idea of what she might do with Bond.

She also has an earlier series on the BBC called Crashing, which I have not yet seen.
  #154  
Old 07-16-2019, 05:02 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is offline
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 42,831
I just have to mention that my previous passport number ended in -007. I got a lot of mileage out of it. When asked my number, I always recited it as double-oh-seven instead of oh-oh-seven while raising one eyebrow, especially if it was an airline agent or other official who was giving me trouble. Unfortunately that one expired and my present one is completely prosaic.
  #155  
Old 07-16-2019, 05:16 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eonwe View Post
He claims that, compared to other franchise movies (like Star Trek), Ghostbusters wasn't statistically a meaningful "flop". Its cost and income are comparable.
I'm not sure I'm parsing this bit correctly, but in Hollywood terms, a movie's break-even point is if the domestic box office is double the budget. Both Ghostbusters and Star Trek failed to even match the budget with domestic box office, much less double it, so they are both pretty severe flops.

Quote:
So, to claim that it was a "flop" or obviously would have been bigger if only the cast wasn't all women is a totally unfounded statement.
This statement is conjecture, though I happen to agree with it. (I personally kind of liked the movie, and the women were fine.) I think the argument went something like "Gamergate demonstrated the depths of nerd culture misogyny, and nerd culture is the target audience for Ghostbusters. If the cast were guys all those trolls who stayed home would have gone to see it."

Even IF that were true -- which I seriously doubt -- nerds have consistently demonstrated to Hollywood that they will NOT come out in force to support a movie, even if they go on to be beloved movies like Kick-Ass (under-performed) or Scott Pilgrim (massive flop).

Going with the most charitable reading of Banquet Bear's point: "How come we don't hear people saying how terrible Star Trek is in unrelated threads, and gnashing of teeth about how badly it flopped?" As someone else already answered: We do! I've seen countless drive-by shitting on JJ's star Trek movies in unrelated threads on the dope for years.

So if that was the point, it isn't a stupid point (so apologies for that), but it is wrong.
  #156  
Old 07-16-2019, 06:49 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
I'm not sure I'm parsing this bit correctly, but in Hollywood terms, a movie's break-even point is if the domestic box office is double the budget. Both Ghostbusters and Star Trek failed to even match the budget with domestic box office, much less double it, so they are both pretty severe flops.
...they both weren't "severe flops." By Hollywood standards they were run-of-the-mill flops. Star Trek Beyond was such a " run-of-the-mill flop" that most people don't even associate the movie with the word "flop." Both movies made over their production budget when you add the foreign box-office, add in streaming, merchandising, a bit of creative hollywood accounting, and all the other revenue streams and both movies didn't lose money.

Quote:
This statement is conjecture, though I happen to agree with it. (I personally kind of liked the movie, and the women were fine.) I think the argument went something like "Gamergate demonstrated the depths of nerd culture misogyny, and nerd culture is the target audience for Ghostbusters. If the cast were guys all those trolls who stayed home would have gone to see it."
Who made that argument?

Quote:
Even IF that were true -- which I seriously doubt -- nerds have consistently demonstrated to Hollywood that they will NOT come out in force to support a movie, even if they go on to be beloved movies like Kick-Ass (under-performed) or Scott Pilgrim (massive flop).
And WTF does this have to do with anything I said?

Quote:
Going with the most charitable reading of Banquet Bear's point: "How come we don't hear people saying how terrible Star Trek is in unrelated threads, and gnashing of teeth about how badly it flopped?" As someone else already answered: We do! I've seen countless drive-by shitting on JJ's star Trek movies in unrelated threads on the dope for years.
To understand my point it has to be read in the context of the post I replied too.

And we don't see "countless drive-by shitting on JJ's star Trek movies" to the same degree as we see the shitting on the Ghostbusters movie. It simply doesn't happen.

Quote:
So if that was the point, it isn't a stupid point (so apologies for that), but it is wrong.
It was an aside. A tangental point made to point out the ridiculousness of the original post I was replying too. People don't jump into threads to point out that the all-male remake was a "box office flop." The post I was replying too was both (using your words) stupid, and wrong. But you aren't arguing with them, you are arguing with me. Why are you being selective with whom you argue with?

Last edited by Banquet Bear; 07-16-2019 at 06:53 PM.
  #157  
Old 07-16-2019, 07:52 PM
Ellis Dee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 14,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...they both weren't "severe flops." By Hollywood standards they were run-of-the-mill flops. Star Trek Beyond was such a " run-of-the-mill flop" that most people don't even associate the movie with the word "flop." Both movies made over their production budget when you add the foreign box-office, add in streaming, merchandising, a bit of creative hollywood accounting, and all the other revenue streams and both movies didn't lose money.
You might consider that how to measure success, but that's not how Hollywood bean counters do it. Double the production budget in domestic box office is the baseline for a "success." Well under half of that is a flop.

Quote:
To understand my point it has to be read in the context of the post I replied too.
Alrighty then, here's the original context:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarvinKitFox View Post
I'm sure it will be a roaring success.
After all, just think of how successful the all-girl Ghostbusters remake was!
...the "all-girl" Ghostbusters remake (128 million domestic to a production budget of 144 million) was arguably more successful than the "all-guy" remake Star Trek Beyond (158 million domestic to a production budget of 185 million, released a week later), yet for some reason people don't run around every time there is a movie with a male lead saying things like "just think of how successful the all-guy Star Trek remake was!"
And here's my restating of that:
"How come we don't hear people saying how terrible Star Trek is in unrelated threads, and gnashing of teeth about how badly it flopped?" As someone else already answered: We do! I've seen countless drive-by shitting on JJ's star Trek movies in unrelated threads on the dope for years.
How is my paraphrasing of your post wrong?

Quote:
And we don't see "countless drive-by shitting on JJ's star Trek movies" to the same degree as we see the shitting on the Ghostbusters movie. It simply doesn't happen.
Yes, we do. I have actually seen more drive-by shitting on of Star Trek than Ghostbusters. Maybe you don't spend much time in Cafe Society? I'm all over this forum, and you aren't one of the names I see very much here. And when I do see you in CS threads, it's usually "SJW" threads like this one as opposed to fan discussions of shows and movies.
  #158  
Old 07-16-2019, 08:03 PM
Cartooniverse is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Betwixt My Ears
Posts: 12,526

I think it's kinda brilliant.


And no I'm not sucking up to the P.C. Police. They can go suck it.

Think about it. In the Universe in which the 00 System exists, the numbers are assigned to different people. Agents die. ( They don't retire. Just ask Jason Bourne. Whoops, wrong Universe )

I honestly do think it's brilliant. If MI5 wants their spies to be able to spread across the planet, they need to NOT all look like they're members of cast of Boondock Saints.

I have a friend. In real life, I might add. She stands a mighty mighty 5 foot 2" tall. She's quite slender. She also made 1st Level Black in Brazillian Ju Jitsu. Do I fear her? Nah, she's a pal. SHOULD I? Well, were I a bad person, yeah.

This idea that action heroes all have to look like a certain physical type is about as logical as insisting that only Men can do research into Radiation. ( Ring, Ring, phone call for Marie Curie )

It's brilliant because it means anyone can be a 00.

Who will they know to look for now?
__________________
If you want to kiss the sky you'd better learn how to kneel.
  #159  
Old 07-16-2019, 08:07 PM
Cartooniverse is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Betwixt My Ears
Posts: 12,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
I just have to mention that my previous passport number ended in -007. I got a lot of mileage out of it. When asked my number, I always recited it as double-oh-seven instead of oh-oh-seven while raising one eyebrow, especially if it was an airline agent or other official who was giving me trouble. Unfortunately that one expired and my present one is completely prosaic.
P = 16
R = 18
0 = 15
S = 19
A = 1
I = 9
C = 3

Now we know your Passport Number !!!

16181519193

__________________
If you want to kiss the sky you'd better learn how to kneel.
  #160  
Old 07-16-2019, 08:12 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
But....why wouldn't he call M, 'sir'?
Of course Bond would call (male) M "Sir", just as he did in all the books. It's a hallmark of the traditional Bond from an earlier era.
  #161  
Old 07-16-2019, 08:41 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
You might consider that how to measure success, but that's not how Hollywood bean counters do it. Double the production budget in domestic box office is the baseline for a "success." Well under half of that is a flop.
...I'm well aware of the "Hollywood formula." It isn't how the bean-counters do it. The formula is a "rule-of-thumb" so that non-bean-counters like you and I can take a guess at a film's profitiability. Its a very old-school concept that like many things doesn't take into account new and different ways of monetising film. I didn't say that both films weren't flops. I said they were both flops. They weren't severe flops though. A severe flop threatens the studio that made it. These films didn't do that.

Quote:
And here's my restating of that:

...

How is my paraphrasing of your post wrong?
No, lets not restate what I said. What I said is what I said. And by the way:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paraphrase
When paraphrasing, it is important to keep the original meaning so that the facts remain intact. Basically, you are writing something in your own words that still expresses the original idea.
https://examples.yourdictionary.com/...aphrasing.html

You didn't express my idea. You expressed your idea. If you want to read what I said then its a simple matter of reading the words that I wrote.

Quote:
Yes, we do. I have actually seen more drive-by shitting on of Star Trek than Ghostbusters. Maybe you don't spend much time in Cafe Society? I'm all over this forum, and you aren't one of the names I see very much here. And when I do see you in CS threads, it's usually "SJW" threads like this one as opposed to fan discussions of shows and movies.
LOL. I'm the official Straight Dope Social Justice Warrior, of course I'm in the so-called-SJW threads. Social justice is important to me. Of course I speak out on social justice issues. But that doesn't mean I don't read other threads. I don't have to post in fan discussions about shows and movies to be able to have read them. The "I post more in Cafe Society" badge doesn't really mean that much. Congrats on being "all over this forum" though. What an accomplishment.
  #162  
Old 07-17-2019, 12:36 AM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,276
This woman gets the 007 moniker, Bond comes back out of retirement, this woman dies, Bond gets 007 back. That what I'm calling.

This is a publicity stunt. The next "James Bond" movie isnt going to be headlined by a black actress. Don't be ridiculous.
  #163  
Old 07-17-2019, 12:55 AM
Dale Sams is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
This woman gets the 007 moniker, Bond comes back out of retirement, this woman dies, Bond gets 007 back. That what I'm calling.

This is a publicity stunt. The next "James Bond" movie isnt going to be headlined by a black actress. Don't be ridiculous.
Yeahhhh....here's an indicator of what a shit-stirring reactionary world we live in: What could possibly happen that would warrant this amount of shit, if the news never dropped??? At the end of Casino Royale, no one said "Can you believe Felix is black????"

A black woman takes over the 007 number? BFD. Its a number. She could be 006 and no one would care.

Craig dies and at the end of the credits it says "007 will return in 'fill in the blank.'?

If this movie sucks it won't get made. If its great hardly any one will care. Who cares??? I don't care. I just care about stunts, and shit-stirring and obnoxiousness.

I'm tired tired tired of the posturing and yes....virtue-signalling. And im tired of the over-reacting and "Im just here for white tears" and "SO AND SO NEEDS TO BE GAY/BLACK/TRANS" I'm tired of colorism. I'm tired of "We don't want your hand-me-down race-changed white characters" Just fucking live and let live FFS.

Enjoy your 15 minutes outrage media cause you're going down.

Edit: Oh and another thing. This stunt is lose-lose-lose. If you're right....man the shit will hit the fan. Can you imagine if the film does basically follow Austin Powers arc? At the beginning she's all strong and independant, and by the end Bond has seduced her and ita all "Oh jammmmmmes"

Last edited by Dale Sams; 07-17-2019 at 12:58 AM.
  #164  
Old 07-17-2019, 12:56 AM
Dale Sams is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...I'm well aware of the "Hollywood formula." It isn't how the bean-counters do it. The formula is a "rule-of-thumb" so that non-bean-counters like you and I can take a guess at a film's profitiability. Its a very old-school concept that like many things doesn't take into account new and different ways of monetising film. I didn't say that both films weren't flops. I said they were both flops. They weren't severe flops though. A severe flop threatens the studio that made it. These films didn't do that.



No, lets not restate what I said. What I said is what I said. And by the way:



https://examples.yourdictionary.com/...aphrasing.html

You didn't express my idea. You expressed your idea. If you want to read what I said then its a simple matter of reading the words that I wrote.



LOL. I'm the official Straight Dope Social Justice Warrior, of course I'm in the so-called-SJW threads. Social justice is important to me. Of course I speak out on social justice issues. But that doesn't mean I don't read other threads. I don't have to post in fan discussions about shows and movies to be able to have read them. The "I post more in Cafe Society" badge doesn't really mean that much. Congrats on being "all over this forum" though. What an accomplishment.
Did Ascenray die???
  #165  
Old 07-17-2019, 01:04 AM
Dale Sams is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
Agent 014 might not have had a LTK, but he was "twice as good as 007".
Did you make a Giligans Island ref??
  #166  
Old 07-17-2019, 01:12 AM
Dale Sams is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
You might consider that how to measure success, but that's not how Hollywood bean counters do it. Double the production budget in domestic box office is the baseline for a "success." Well under half of that is a flop.
Uhm....thats not how they measure it. International money isn't inherently worth less.

Beyond made about twice its budget. Thats before all post movie money. GB 2016 made $229 on a $144 budget. That's not so great. Frigging Ghostbusters II almost made that amount.

But i don't think you could call GB 2016 a flop. ? Maybe? I do know that they were going to make a ST 4 but skimped so much on salary that it didn't happen.
  #167  
Old 07-17-2019, 01:39 AM
Alessan's Avatar
Alessan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 24,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
Uhm....thats not how they measure it. International money isn't inherently worth less.
Actually, I think it is. IIRC, a smaller portion of foreign box office receipts end up in the hands of the distributor/studio, compared to U.S. receipts. Remember, film revenues measure total box office - the theaters also get a share, which varies by country and date.
  #168  
Old 07-17-2019, 02:08 AM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
I'm tired tired tired of the posturing and yes....virtue-signalling. And im tired of the over-reacting and "Im just here for white tears" and "SO AND SO NEEDS TO BE GAY/BLACK/TRANS" I'm tired of colorism. I'm tired of "We don't want your hand-me-down race-changed white characters" Just fucking live and let live FFS.
Meh, if you were really tired of it you wouldn't be here, because you'd be avoiding discussions of race and casting in popular entertainment franchises, which is actually quite easy to do. It seems like what you want is to continue participating in the shit-stirring while moaning about how tedious it is and how that's all other people's fault.
  #169  
Old 07-17-2019, 03:24 AM
DerNils is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 52
It is a Publicity stunt, and it is working. My guess? New 007 will have the role as the ass kicking kind of Bond Girl (like Michelle Yeoh in Tomorrow never dies) and they will gauge how much people like it. The good question is what will they do with it? They call the movies Bond movies, not 007 movies. This could become their spinoff series to test the Waters. Have sufficient Nostalgia via M, Q, gadgetry and so on, but doing something really new.
The Bond Franchise was always a strange one, because it was there before we had common expectationsfor franchises. So you could recast willy nilly, you could even do the same plot twice over.
The Daniel Craig incarnation of Bond has more storytelling and across movie plots than ever before. The question is, are watchers interested in so much stuff in their Superspy movies? Is Mission Impossible doing that? Bourne?
I am all up for a Black Female 007 series, but would feel that this are more like the "Fantastic Beast" series are to the Potter stories. Which may be what is needed.
  #170  
Old 07-17-2019, 07:06 AM
Dale Sams is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Meh, if you were really tired of it you wouldn't be here, because you'd be avoiding discussions of race and casting in popular entertainment franchises, which is actually quite easy to do. It seems like what you want is to continue participating in the shit-stirring while moaning about how tedious it is and how that's all other people's fault.
Faulty premise, strawman annnnnnnnd.....damn no ad hominem. No hat trick for you son.
  #171  
Old 07-17-2019, 07:10 AM
Dale Sams is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
Actually, I think it is. IIRC, a smaller portion of foreign box office receipts end up in the hands of the distributor/studio, compared to U.S. receipts. Remember, film revenues measure total box office - the theaters also get a share, which varies by country and date.
(Gives Jack Benny look at camera) "Oh."
  #172  
Old 07-17-2019, 04:31 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
Craig dies and at the end of the credits it says "007 will return in 'fill in the blank.'?
Except that they're James Bond movies, not 007 movies. They always say "James Bond will return [in <movie name>]"

I still think it'll be that the new actress' character gets the 007 number and SIS operational role, and somehow James Bond will get involved, without actually being 007.
  #173  
Old 07-17-2019, 04:47 PM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
Except that they're James Bond movies, not 007 movies. They always say "James Bond will return [in <movie name>]"
I actually am very curious as to how they'll replace Craig, assuming this one is his last. Pre-Craig, every Bond was the same character, just a new actor. But Casino Royale was explicitly a reboot. And we're now in the era of "reboot cinema." So will they reboot or recast?
  #174  
Old 07-17-2019, 06:22 PM
Dale Sams is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
I actually am very curious as to how they'll replace Craig, assuming this one is his last. Pre-Craig, every Bond was the same character, just a new actor. But Casino Royale was explicitly a reboot. And we're now in the era of "reboot cinema." So will they reboot or recast?
Maybe they both die, and some third character gets promoted.
  #175  
Old 07-18-2019, 09:38 AM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
Maybe they both die, and some third character gets promoted.
I'm not talking about 007, I'm talking about James Bond.
  #176  
Old 07-18-2019, 10:25 AM
Alessan's Avatar
Alessan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 24,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
I'm not talking about 007, I'm talking about James Bond.
...can you dig it?
  #177  
Old 07-18-2019, 10:39 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 25,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
I'm tired tired tired of the posturing and yes....virtue-signalling.
I'd rather virtue-signalling than ...shall we call it vice-signalling? ...whatever it is the reactionaries are doing.
Quote:
And im tired of the over-reacting and "Im just here for white tears"
*sip*
Quote:
I'm tired of colorism
Please explain to me how it's NOT the people complaining about a Black bond (of any gender) who are guilty of this.
Quote:
. I'm tired of "We don't want your hand-me-down race-changed white characters" Just fucking live and let live FFS.
We'll "live and let live" the day after your side starts, 'cos they sure as shit ain't "letting" us live right now...
  #178  
Old 07-18-2019, 12:51 PM
Just Asking Questions is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 7,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
...can you dig it?
I hear that cat Bond is a baaad mutha.....
  #179  
Old 07-18-2019, 02:14 PM
Dale Sams is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
I'd rather virtue-signalling than ...shall we call it vice-signalling? ...whatever it is the reactionaries are doing.

*sip*
Please explain to me how it's NOT the people complaining about a Black bond (of any gender) who are guilty of this.

We'll "live and let live" the day after your side starts, 'cos they sure as shit ain't "letting" us live right now...
MY side? The fuck you talking about? You don't know me.
  #180  
Old 07-18-2019, 03:54 PM
Omar Little's Avatar
Omar Little is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Within
Posts: 13,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
I actually am very curious as to how they'll replace Craig, assuming this one is his last. Pre-Craig, every Bond was the same character, just a new actor. But Casino Royale was explicitly a reboot. And we're now in the era of "reboot cinema." So will they reboot or recast?
It will continue as the James Bond franchise, reboot or recast, whichever. There will not be a future movie with Lashana Lynch, playing 007, as the lead.
  #181  
Old 07-18-2019, 04:27 PM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omar Little View Post
It will continue as the James Bond franchise, reboot or recast, whichever. There will not be a future movie with Lashana Lynch, playing 007, as the lead.
Yeah, that's what I've been saying over and over. I'm just wondering if it will be a reboot or a recast.
  #182  
Old 07-18-2019, 04:32 PM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 25,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
MY side? The fuck you talking about? You don't know me.
I know you're not on my side. That's enough to go on.

I also note you didn't answer my question.

Last edited by MrDibble; 07-18-2019 at 04:33 PM.
  #183  
Old 07-18-2019, 05:22 PM
Dale Sams is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
I know you're not on my side. That's enough to go on.

I also note you didn't answer my question.
Your side seems to be 90 IQ Tribalist...so you have that much right.

I can't parse your incoherent screeching. You seem to be asking me to prove a negative from a faulty position.
  #184  
Old 07-18-2019, 09:04 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,492
[Moderating]

OK, I'm going to make one last attempt to keep this thread alive.

First of all, let's avoid terms like "my side", and "your side", because that leads nowhere beyond making the arguments personal. If you absolutely must refer to sides, then be explicit, like "The side that thinks that no woman should headline a 007 movie", or "the side that thinks that maleness is an inherent attribute of the character of James Bond", or "the side that is upset about Lynch's role in the upcoming movie", or the like.

Second, speaking of personalizing arguments,
Quote:
Your side seems to be 90 IQ Tribalist...so you have that much right.
This is a personal insult, and so this is a formal Warning for Dale Sams.
  #185  
Old 07-18-2019, 09:46 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post

.... We'll "live and let live" ...
Given the subject includes racist premises in Bond, this really should be "Live and Let Die."

So pretty much understood that Bond is the star of the show and that Lynch's 007 is a supporting character of unknown screen time, possibly killed off early, maybe of more significance.

I'm also guessing reboot post-Craig as they've played this Bond through an arc that a new younger Bond could not just pick up. But likely not starting at a new origin story and a bit less serious in its mood compared to the Craig Bond.

Given Phoebe Waller-Bridge's being brought in I suspect this one will be a taste for a smarter Bond movie that has some fun interesting characters including strong women that also play at the Bond tropes while subverting them with some killer lines. IF the franchise is to transition to another incarnation after Craig it will require that.
  #186  
Old 07-18-2019, 09:58 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,356
Oh. There is plenty of room for movies about women super agent spies. Salt, for one example, did a fine albeit absurd, job. Bond though is a male stereotype, a caricature. Bond is a British male who is very much a reaction to and a riff about "the rules." He can be any race but he is a British man who at least successfully pretends to be a very proper one.

Is there still a market for movies that feature that stereotype? I'm guessing yes, so long as it subverts other ones in the process. But if not then the franchise folds, end.
  #187  
Old 07-19-2019, 08:26 AM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 18,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
I actually am very curious as to how they'll replace Craig, assuming this one is his last. Pre-Craig, every Bond was the same character, just a new actor. But Casino Royale was explicitly a reboot. And we're now in the era of "reboot cinema." So will they reboot or recast?
I suspect they won't reboot again; they've just managed to get a good Blofeld, a good Felix Leiter, a couple of good Ms, a new Q, and a good Moneypenny. Seems kind of... wasteful(?) to turn around and burn all that down now.

I suspect they'll do one of a handful of things. They'll just recast another handsome white guy as Bond, and carry on as if nothing changed, just like they did in the previous Bond universe. I suspect this is by far the most likely course of action.

Or they'll recast someone different- say Idris Elba, and explicitly include the notion that "James Bond" is more of a role/pseudonym than a specific person. This runs counter to a lot of the already established canon from "Skyfall"- the Scottish mansion was definitely the possession of Bond's parents as Andrew and Monique Bond.

Or maybe they'll just recast it with Elba, and just carry on as if nothing happened. I don't see this going over particularly well- it runs in the face of 50+ years of cinematic canon, and more than that of literary canon.

I wouldn't be surprised if they cast Elba as maybe another 00 agent, and potentially turn that into a spin-off franchise of some sort. That might be REALLY interesting.
  #188  
Old 07-19-2019, 08:45 AM
Just Asking Questions is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 7,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
I wouldn't be surprised if they cast Elba as maybe another 00 agent, and potentially turn that into a spin-off franchise of some sort. That might be REALLY interesting.
If they wait much longer to make a movie with him, they'll have to cast him as M.
  #189  
Old 07-20-2019, 06:25 AM
BeagleJesus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 173
I think the biggest take away from all of these discussions about which race/gender can play which fictional character is that a lot of people perceive a character to be an image first and substance maybe.

I just wish it wasn’t so damn depressing to learn that, to many people, who you are will never trump what you look like even in a fictional world.
  #190  
Old 07-21-2019, 11:51 AM
mack is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 3,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowFacts View Post
Fleabag, which is about as far from James Bond as you can possibly get, but is one of my top 3 shows of the last 5 years, if not my favorite. It's hard to get how amazing it is in clip form, but here's a trailer.

Killing Eve is spy/action-oriented and would give you a better idea of what she might do with Bond.

She also has an earlier series on the BBC called Crashing, which I have not yet seen.
Yeah her Killing Eve writing demonstrates that she’s not without talent when it comes to international intrigue, unusual relationships, and fucked up ways of killing people.

Fleabag was great, if a little too snarky. She has a way of springing interesting surprises where I’m like haha then OMG.

I think one thing she does well is relationships between people who at the same time can barely stand each other but there’s underlying tenderness.

Bond characters are kind of carved in stone though so it will be interesting to see how much latitude they give her.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:02 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017