Super Sweet Movie Discussion Thread

Rumor has it that there is gay Bond in the cue. So tired of every hollywierd movie having a gay innuendo.🙄
 
To date, there have been 24 Bond movies. Why not try something different? Hell, there was a rumor about casting a prominent black actor last year (Idris Elba was the name thrown around), and that could've been something unique and different. I don't see the problem here.
 
To date, there have been 24 Bond movies. Why not try something different? Hell, there was a rumor about casting a prominent black actor last year (Idris Elba was the name thrown around), and that could've been something unique and different. I don't see the problem here.

Agreed.

007 as a character is supposed to just be the agent identifier, not a singular specific character archetype or gender. Personally I'd love to see Idris Elba fill the role but I wouldn't mind seeing Blunt either.
 
Agreed.

007 as a character is supposed to just be the agent identifier, not a singular specific character archetype or gender. Personally I'd love to see Idris Elba fill the role but I wouldn't mind seeing Blunt either.
Sure but if they tried to use the same name is where I go nope. Retired James Bond and a new 007 with a new name/color/gender/whatever fine.
 
One of the biggest fan theories out there is that Bond isn't the same guy. It is an alias that goes with the 007 title. I've only read one of the books so I don't know if that was Fleming's intent, but it gives the Broccoli family an opening to cast whomever. I love most of the actresses on that list, but a Bond who isn't a straight male?

images
 
One of the biggest fan theories out there is that Bond isn't the same guy. It is an alias that goes with the 007 title. I've only read one of the books so I don't know if that was Fleming's intent, but it gives the Broccoli family an opening to cast whomever. I love most of the actresses on that list, but a Bond who isn't a straight male?

images
I’m never against expanding roles to allow for a wider range of casting choices, I just don’t like seeing a Character with such a set personality changed. He’s 007- there are several other 00 agents. Maybe start a spin off with 006 or whatever and have that be the set female lead.
 
To date, there have been 24 Bond movies. Why not try something different? Hell, there was a rumor about casting a prominent black actor last year (Idris Elba was the name thrown around), and that could've been something unique and different. I don't see the problem here.

Because the James Bond character isn't black and isn't female. Flemming drew pictures of bond as a white dude. Sure, it's cool to have a different 007 agent character, but would you change the black panther to a white women? You don't have to change everything in the name of equality.
 
"Bond...Janet Bond"

Nah.....doesn't work. With the ending of the last Bond, you could easily say he has retired. Fill the empty 007 with whoever you want....but create a new character to fill it.
 
There have been plenty of successful action movies with female leads. Kill Bill, Lara Croft, Hunger Games etc, but females were the original characters. The Bond franchise is so established as a male, I just don't think a female would draw the same numbers. Even if you spun it, made Jane Bond his daughter or niece, I don't think it would be as successful as the Daniel Craig character...and IMV, he's been the best Bond ever. He's tough, professional, he bleeds and more accurately reflects (with exaggeration, of course) the kind of ex-SAS type we'd expect to be on the direct action side of the biz.
 
Last edited:
Because the James Bond character isn't black and isn't female. Flemming drew pictures of bond as a white dude. Sure, it's cool to have a different 007 agent character, but would you change the black panther to a white women? You don't have to change everything in the name of equality.
We always imagine the 007 character as a suave, erudite super agent. They did this all the way from Sean Connery to Pierce Brosnan, and that got really stale and boring after a while. Then they introduced the Daniel Craig Bond, who was a gruff and working-class Bond who was okay with just brutally beating the shit out of the bad guys. It was a totally novel and unique approach to the franchise, and made for a great film.

Hell, if you want to talk about authorial intent, Ian Fleming didn't want Sean Connery playing Bond. But today we think of Sean Connery as the prototypical Bond type. It worked super well! So I don't put a lot of faith in whatever pictures Fleming drew

And lastly, the comparison to the Black Panther is disingenuous and you know it. For that character, blackness and Africa are absolutely essential to the character - there is no story without it. Wouldn't you agree that there are women and black people in the real MI6? Why couldn't the fictional version of MI6 have some representation in it? Unless you think that MI6 is just white people. Idris Elba is super cool, and there are a dozen other prominent black actors that could do a good Bond. And if written well, you could make an Angelina Jolie-type into a James Bond (Jane Bond? I don't know, just call them "007")

Anyway, the point is that I don't buy the argument that we have to stick to archtypes when it comes to these very flexible characters. And I also disagree that this is an attempt to "change everything in the name of equality." It's trying to change things because the last few movies have gotten kind of stale.
 
Last edited:
They're trying to change major franchises because they are lazy writers. They want an easy payday.

It's true. And thats also why they make sequels, remakes and take TV shows from the 70s and 80's and turn them into movies. Hemingway said it: Nothing is original.
 
I watched Darkest Hour last night. Very good movie. I think Oldman did a great job playing Churchill. A story that reminded me and my son how important Churchill is to history. A few laughs along the way too.
 
Back
Top