Well, the point of Shepard was to suit all-comers.Saetha said:
And also Jennifer Hale has that powerful, commanding, yet gentle and soothing voice. *swoon*
What Would The Reaction To A Female Bond (007, that is) Be?
- Thread starter RJ 17
- Start date
Recommended Videos
And also Jennifer Hale has that powerful, commanding, yet gentle and soothing voice. *swoon*
Well I'd expect lots of whining and accusations about why it was done.
Personally I'd be cool with it
Personally I'd be cool with it
You'd probably get people complaining about gender swapping simply to appease the SJW's, and to get publicity. As to the sex bit, I'm sure they would downplay that, so as to not upset anyones moral opinions about what a virtuous woman does.RJ 17 said:
I personally don't care either way. Never was a huge Bond fan, but I've found the movies somewhat interesting, though they're usually too cliche and tropey for my enjoyment. But if they want to make a female Bond, and let her be as sexist and mysoginistic as the other Bond's but towards men, whatever. They won't get my money to see the movie, but then the Bond's haven't seen my money since Pierce Brosnan went to North Korea, whichever one that was.
Well, James Bond is supposed to be the same guy, so it would not make sense, but ignoring that:
Probably a mixture of offense from feminists because "femme fatale" stereotype and MRA-types because everything.
... Yeah, probably not a good idea. Better create a new female agent.
Probably a mixture of offense from feminists because "femme fatale" stereotype and MRA-types because everything.
... Yeah, probably not a good idea. Better create a new female agent.
While it could be interesting, I'm still left confused every time this conversation comes up as to why a new character can't be made that is female? Is the assumption that a female character doing the same things as the male can't succeed unless they piggyback on an existing fandom?
If the idea is that you need to change the gender in order to shake things up in the franchise, maybe let it die? If the idea is just to get another female character out there, why not just make a new female character? In the case of Bond fandom, introduce a female agent in a movie that he doesn't sleep with, and is just as capable as he is, and see if the fandom is interested.
Look at Furiosa. People are clamoring for a standalone movie for her. They didn't have to make it Mad Maxine, they just introduced a compelling character that resonated with enough of the audience to cause a stir.
If the idea is that you need to change the gender in order to shake things up in the franchise, maybe let it die? If the idea is just to get another female character out there, why not just make a new female character? In the case of Bond fandom, introduce a female agent in a movie that he doesn't sleep with, and is just as capable as he is, and see if the fandom is interested.
Look at Furiosa. People are clamoring for a standalone movie for her. They didn't have to make it Mad Maxine, they just introduced a compelling character that resonated with enough of the audience to cause a stir.
Let's look at the Female Ghostbusters then. It won't go over well for a variety of reasons, the most prevalent being one of two things. If it's gonna be the same, but with females instead of males, what's the point of remaking it? If it isn't going to be similar, why the hell are you plopping the franchise name on it?
Personally, wouldn't so much have a problem with it, but I don't really like it either because Bond is largely that male silliness you don't get much out of anywhere anymore.
Not to mention they still haven't exactly done a Bond adaptation, the closest they got was Dr.No, and it was one of the most boring of the franchise.
Personally, wouldn't so much have a problem with it, but I don't really like it either because Bond is largely that male silliness you don't get much out of anywhere anymore.
Not to mention they still haven't exactly done a Bond adaptation, the closest they got was Dr.No, and it was one of the most boring of the franchise.
It's a terrible idea. It would be cheap no matter how good it may look on the outside. Changing the gender of an iconic character isn't as simple as changing the color of his skin. Bond's gender is at the very core of the character. It's what the character is built upon. Gender isn't as irrelevant as some SJW want people to think. It's very important. This isn't the same as Ghostbusters though. There's nothing about Ghostbuster characters that can't be successfully transferred to females. It's not really about who they are as people so it's OK. And they're not that iconic. They don't have that many unique qualities that they absolutely must be males.
James Bond is a different story. The character doesn't exist unless he's male. So when you change gender of someone like that you're basically creating a new character without a real personality and you're giving that character the stuff that belongs to the original guy. That's why it's cheap. No matter how good the writer is, it would still be absolutely terrible. It would be like making Lara Croft into Larry Croft. Stupidest fuckin' idea you can think of.
The question I have is why would people want to remake iconic characters with a different gender? Did everybody lose their freakin' mind all of a sudden? Did political correctness rob you of common sense? Gender is not a trivial characteristic of a character that can be changed at a whim. Gender is at the core of a character. It defines a character in many ways. So instead of wanting to make iconic characters into same ones with a different gender, why don't people simply want a similar character instead? Isn't that what Nathan Drake is compared to Lara Croft?
James Bond is a different story. The character doesn't exist unless he's male. So when you change gender of someone like that you're basically creating a new character without a real personality and you're giving that character the stuff that belongs to the original guy. That's why it's cheap. No matter how good the writer is, it would still be absolutely terrible. It would be like making Lara Croft into Larry Croft. Stupidest fuckin' idea you can think of.
The question I have is why would people want to remake iconic characters with a different gender? Did everybody lose their freakin' mind all of a sudden? Did political correctness rob you of common sense? Gender is not a trivial characteristic of a character that can be changed at a whim. Gender is at the core of a character. It defines a character in many ways. So instead of wanting to make iconic characters into same ones with a different gender, why don't people simply want a similar character instead? Isn't that what Nathan Drake is compared to Lara Croft?
They actually kind of did this in the spy who loved me. Bond teams up with this female russian agent and they go save the world together or something. They did a pretty good job of making them seem like equals throughout the film...until she turns into a damsel in distress for Bond to save in the 3rd act. But it was doing well until that. It also had jaws in it. Good film. I should re-watch it.
But this is Bond we're talking about. I think we dropped any pretence of realism sometime around goldfinger.inu-kun said:
How about we write some badass new characters instead of messing with all of our preexisting ones?
I've got nothing wrong with a badass female secret agent, but I'd rather have a Joanna Dark movie than a "Jane" Bond movie.
I've got nothing wrong with a badass female secret agent, but I'd rather have a Joanna Dark movie than a "Jane" Bond movie.
Sort of? It was at least somewhat justifiable when the "code name" theory was a plausible thing within the film franchise. Not only did it make a sort of sense with the changing times, technologies, and actors but it also allowed a great deal of flexibility with modifying the character's traits.Silvanus said:
Now that it's been officially, canonically denied once and for all by Skyfall (and a few other small holes in the Roger Moore movies) the whole thing with that guy is just bonkers, but he apparently is now a specific person.
Never did read the books.
End of the day though, I'd be a hell of a lot happier with new characters than gender-swapping and re-purposing old ones. For all of the bitching an moaning people do about Hollywood having no new ideas, you'd think they'd want new IPs rather than more retreading of old ones with slightly different aesthetics.
Probably couldn't be worse than Daniel Craig! (I kid, I kid...)
A bunch of people would hate it, a bunch of people would love it just for the sake of change, and a handful of people would actually judge it on the performance, which might be good, might be bad, depending on the actress, script, director, etc.
I don't really care, but I don't see why they'd make another sequel to a franchise that's been in theaters since 1962 when they could instead adapt one of the 50,000+ interesting books with female protagonists into a movie and maybe create a "new" character.
Bad example perhaps but look at something like The Hunger Games. Pretty sure that grossed more cash than a female bond would, if we're talking in Hollywoo business decisions, etc.
A bunch of people would hate it, a bunch of people would love it just for the sake of change, and a handful of people would actually judge it on the performance, which might be good, might be bad, depending on the actress, script, director, etc.
I don't really care, but I don't see why they'd make another sequel to a franchise that's been in theaters since 1962 when they could instead adapt one of the 50,000+ interesting books with female protagonists into a movie and maybe create a "new" character.
Bad example perhaps but look at something like The Hunger Games. Pretty sure that grossed more cash than a female bond would, if we're talking in Hollywoo business decisions, etc.
Why not a Mirror's Edge / Metroid / Perfect Dark / Tomb Raider / Resident Evil / Final Fantasy / Starcraft: Brood War / Portal / Transistor / Beyond Good and Evil / etc. movie...? They've got strong female leads...
