303 replies to this topic

[Bond Bombshell]

From the most watched vid on YT 119.637, its like 1.388, dislike 52

Guess that says it all. Its very well received

No it doesn't say it all. The video is highlighted by YouTube under its International Womens' Day selection. Its not even apparent that Bond is featured in the video which is called "EQUALS". As such it is bound to receive a significant number of hits from supporters of this kind of cause. Rather like the video itself you're using figures in a simplistic way without examining the full story behind them.

What is clear however, is that the video has polarised the Bond fandom. Look at other Bond fansites where the argument is raging more significantly than on this one. Some support it as a worthy cause, some see it as evidence of the further emasculation of Bond, and some like me are just dismayed to see the use of the image in the political arena.

[dunda]

From the most watched vid on YT 119.637, its like 1.388, dislike 52

Guess that says it all. Its very well received

No it doesn't say it all. The video is highlighted by YouTube under its International Womens' Day selection. Its not even apparent that Bond is featured in the video which is called "EQUALS". As such it is bound to receive a significant number of hits from supporters of this kind of cause. Rather like the video itself you're using figures in a simplistic way without examining the full story behind them.

What is clear however, is that the video has polarised the Bond fandom. Look at other Bond fansites where the argument is raging more significantly than on this one. Some support it as a worthy cause, some see it as evidence of the further emasculation of Bond, and some like me are just dismayed to see the use of the image in the political arena.

I agree with you that the number of hits doesn't say much, because the title doesn't imply a "Bond connection", but what says a lot is the number of "likes" and "dislikes". I suppose people hit the like/dislike button after watching it and knowing it's about Bond.....and the majority seems to like it.

[Bond Bombshell]

I agree with you that the number of hits doesn't say much, because the title doesn't imply a "Bond connection", but what says a lot is the number of "likes" and "dislikes". I suppose people hit the like/dislike button after watching it and knowing it's about Bond.....and the majority seems to like it.

I think you've missed my point. My point is that partly because of the way it's advertised on YouTube and partly because of its politics, the video is attracting a large quantity of hits from people who are politically motivated in this direction. As such its likes/dislikes ratio is skewed according to its audience which does not represent a random cross section of the public and definitely does not accurately reflect the Bond fandom. In short, if you stick up a femininst video, you are going to get a lot of feminists watching it and pressing the like button!

Edited by Bond Bombshell, 08 March 2011 - 01:35 PM.

[Binyamin]

There was a time when strong, respectful men did not have to wear women's clothes in an attempt to prove they were true gentlemen.

Disappointing that now shock value wins over quiet character.

Edited by Binyamin, 08 March 2011 - 02:09 PM.

[Zorin Industries]

This is utterly ridiculous and a misuse of the Bond-Trademark.

I respect the discussion about gender equality. But it quickly becomes absurd when they use fantasy figures like Bond to make a point. Bond's masculinity is not the only clash between his world and our society. After all, he kills people, too.

There is no use of the Bond trademark in this film. Featuring Dench and Daniel is not akin to the Bond brand. It may be to those that can only associate their work with one brand but not to the people trying to use irony and comedy to make an extremely valid point.

[Zorin Industries]

Terrible. Absolutely terrible, and embarrassing for Bond and all involved. Just fuel for all the Craig haters really. First it was the blond Bond, then the Bond who couldnt drive a stick, then the Bond who doesnt get the girls, now it will be the Bond who dresses in drag. Mark my words, that video is going to be haunting us for years to come...

What utter rubbish. Is everyone so precious as to suggest an actor playing Bond is unable to do anything other than Bond related work?

And can folk stop and ponder the very notion of domestic violence and the real equality of some women globally and at home before passing scorn and scoffing amusement at this viral film? I also think a few fans round here have missed the point of it and assumed their own fandom and precious geekery was more pressing than the safety of other individuals and citizens not a million miles from home.

And as for some people's unimaginative, prehistoric and uneducated notions of "feminism". Don't use the term if you haven't a clue about the doctrines, writings, experiences, movements and passions at play.

There - anger over. As you were.

[jaguar007]

There is no use of the Bond trademark in this film. Featuring Dench and Daniel is not akin to the Bond brand. It may be to those that can only associate their work with one brand but not to the people trying to use irony and comedy to make an extremely valid point.

Except that Dench calls him "007" in the video.

[Jim]

Terrible. Absolutely terrible, and embarrassing for Bond and all involved. Just fuel for all the Craig haters really. First it was the blond Bond, then the Bond who couldnt drive a stick, then the Bond who doesnt get the girls, now it will be the Bond who dresses in drag. Mark my words, that video is going to be haunting us for years to come...

What utter rubbish. Is everyone so precious as to suggest an actor playing Bond is unable to do anything other than Bond related work?

And can folk stop and ponder the very notion of domestic violence and the real equality of some women globally and at home before passing scorn and scoffing amusement at this viral film? I also think a few fans round here have missed the point of it and assumed their own fandom and precious geekery was more pressing than the safety of other individuals and citizens not a million miles from home.

And as for some people's unimaginative, prehistoric and uneducated notions of "feminism". Don't use the term if you haven't a clue about the doctrines, writings, experiences, movements and passions at play.

There - anger over. As you were.

Quite.

"Embarassing for Bond".

I mean, for 's sake. It may be embarassing for some light entertainment. Long-hard-look-at-oneself-time.

It's their property, they can do what they want with it. They're doing this with it and I applaud them for it.

[RJJB]

The first version I saw of this did not include Craig being called 007. I have no problem with an indepedent ad using the character in drag. If it were a regualr movie, then I'd be ticked.

[Chief of SIS]

I might be in the minority here but good for them. I mean sweet Moses. I would like to think all of us here would put the importance of women's rights and equality over something as petty and small as a 2 minute video possibly misrepresenting the image of one of the world's greatest misogynists. I love Bond. I do not feel bad for calling him a misogynist. He is one. It is called a character flaw and it's crucial to the Bond character itself. That being said, the 007 brand carries influential power. They have a duty to flex its muscle once and awhile and attempt to promote socially positive ideas.

The Bond movies themselves do not do the best to promote female equality or issues. M is the closest thing we got right now. However, Bond films should never really be about those things. What is crucial is to make sure those unmentioned and implied topics that may emerge from cracks of the films do not go undiscussed. If Craig and Dench feel it is necessary to relate Bond and the women's issues to provide a positive message, they not only have a right but duty to do so. I hope we are not conceded enough to put a brand based on a fictional character over the effectiveness and usage of that brand to further important social discussion.

[Jim]

However, Bond films should never really be about those things. What is crucial is to make sure those unmentioned and implied topics that may emerge from cracks of the films do not go undiscussed. If Craig and Dench feel it is necessary to relate Bond and the women's issues to provide a positive message, they not only have a right but duty to do so. I hope we are not conceded enough to put a brand based on a fictional character over the effectiveness and usage of that brand to further important social discussion.

Agreed. It's the most popular fictional character in the world - why on Earth should it shun being used for elevation of any issue?

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

However, Bond films should never really be about those things. What is crucial is to make sure those unmentioned and implied topics that may emerge from cracks of the films do not go undiscussed. If Craig and Dench feel it is necessary to relate Bond and the women's issues to provide a positive message, they not only have a right but duty to do so. I hope we are not conceded enough to put a brand based on a fictional character over the effectiveness and usage of that brand to further important social discussion.

Agreed. It's the most popular fictional character in the world - why on Earth should it shun being used for elevation of any issue?

I agree also. At the end of the day if it helps just ONE woman in a struggle against domestic violence then it's been worthwhile.

[SecretAgentFan]

However, Bond films should never really be about those things. What is crucial is to make sure those unmentioned and implied topics that may emerge from cracks of the films do not go undiscussed. If Craig and Dench feel it is necessary to relate Bond and the women's issues to provide a positive message, they not only have a right but duty to do so. I hope we are not conceded enough to put a brand based on a fictional character over the effectiveness and usage of that brand to further important social discussion.

Agreed. It's the most popular fictional character in the world - why on Earth should it shun being used for elevation of any issue?

I agree also. At the end of the day if it helps just ONE woman in a struggle against domestic violence then it's been worthwhile.

True. I find it amusing that some "fans" go ballistic seeing the current Bond actor making a point and therefore dressing up as a woman (and taking those features down, by the way, because womanhood definitely can be a drag).

This "outrage" is obviously saying more about those "fans" than about BB or DC.

[Matt_13]

This is ballsy on Daniel Craig's part, and he is showcasing far more confidence than anyone on here who finds issue with this. Seriously good for him. No doubt he and everyone else involved was aware that some nearsighted trolls would find issue with the advert. If it's sole purpose was to garner a laugh, then yes, it would be a bit odd. This is promoting a very, very important issue in a shocking way, and people are definitely talking about it. I would LOVE to see anyone on here who finds issue with this to feel confident enough in themselves to step up and do something like this to raise awareness for a cause. You are all clearly insecure and a bit childish. Man up or shut up. That's going on a tshirt.

[Jump James]

This is ballsy on Daniel Craig's part, and he is showcasing far more confidence than anyone on here who finds issue with this. Seriously good for him. No doubt he and everyone else involved was aware that some nearsighted trolls would find issue with the advert. If it's sole purpose was to garner a laugh, then yes, it would be a bit odd. This is promoting a very, very important issue in a shocking way, and people are definitely talking about it. I would LOVE to see anyone on here who finds issue with this to feel confident enough in themselves to step up and do something like this to raise awareness for a cause. You are all clearly insecure and a bit childish. Man up or shut up. That's going on a tshirt.

It's very ballsy (is that a word?) I never thought we would see the day super cool Craig did this. Wonderful, although he does remind me of a petrol pump wearing a dress. Good for him!

[Germanlady]

This is ballsy on Daniel Craig's part, and he is showcasing far more confidence than anyone on here who finds issue with this. Seriously good for him. No doubt he and everyone else involved was aware that some nearsighted trolls would find issue with the advert. If it's sole purpose was to garner a laugh, then yes, it would be a bit odd. This is promoting a very, very important issue in a shocking way, and people are definitely talking about it. I would LOVE to see anyone on here who finds issue with this to feel confident enough in themselves to step up and do something like this to raise awareness for a cause. You are all clearly insecure and a bit childish. Man up or shut up. That's going on a tshirt.

It's very ballsy (is that a word?) I never thought we would see the day super cool Craig did this. Wonderful, although he does remind me of a petrol pump wearing a dress. Good for him!

Absolutely. Also - if you watch whatever vid on YT, the likes are always in the majority - by far - so its not only the one I pointed out before.

[Jump James]

This is ballsy on Daniel Craig's part, and he is showcasing far more confidence than anyone on here who finds issue with this. Seriously good for him. No doubt he and everyone else involved was aware that some nearsighted trolls would find issue with the advert. If it's sole purpose was to garner a laugh, then yes, it would be a bit odd. This is promoting a very, very important issue in a shocking way, and people are definitely talking about it. I would LOVE to see anyone on here who finds issue with this to feel confident enough in themselves to step up and do something like this to raise awareness for a cause. You are all clearly insecure and a bit childish. Man up or shut up. That's going on a tshirt.

It's very ballsy (is that a word?) I never thought we would see the day super cool Craig did this. Wonderful, although he does remind me of a petrol pump wearing a dress. Good for him!

Absolutely. Also - if you watch whatever vid on YT, the likes are always in the majority - by far - so its not only the one I pointed out before.

Going by the comments section of YouTube it seems like it attracts a large number of trolls. And if they are the ones voting then it doesn't really count for much. I doubt they treat it very seriously.

Edited by Jump James, 08 March 2011 - 05:49 PM.

[Goodnight]

This is ballsy on Daniel Craig's part, and he is showcasing far more confidence than anyone on here who finds issue with this. Seriously good for him. No doubt he and everyone else involved was aware that some nearsighted trolls would find issue with the advert. If it's sole purpose was to garner a laugh, then yes, it would be a bit odd. This is promoting a very, very important issue in a shocking way, and people are definitely talking about it. I would LOVE to see anyone on here who finds issue with this to feel confident enough in themselves to step up and do something like this to raise awareness for a cause. You are all clearly insecure and a bit childish. Man up or shut up. That's going on a tshirt.

I couldn't have put it better myself sir!

Agreed. I like the way the 'internet tough guys' like to bash other mens masculinity.

Even in drag, Daniel Craig is still more masculine than most men anyway, especially silly little keyboard bashing nerds!!


I think the issue the nerds have with it is actually to do with their own deep insecurities, and not to do with actually worrying about the future of the Bond franchise.



Like he said "Man up, or shut up".

[SecretAgentFan]

On the other hand, those enraged people here make me feel very 2006. How wonderful!

[Napoleon Solo]

I think people are forgetting that Craig's not playing Bond here, he's playing on the image of Bond, hence the lack of dialogue. Think about Hugh Jackman's "Got milk" advert where he was Wolverine. It's not to be taken seriously.

If anything, the irony involved in this video has enforced the idea of what Bond actually is. Bond is so unashamedly the way he is that he can get away with things like this. My Facebook feed is full of approval for it.

Dench addresses him as 007 at the start of the video. I think Craig is playing Bond, not just playing off the image.

[Mr_Wint]

This is utterly ridiculous and a misuse of the Bond-Trademark.

I respect the discussion about gender equality. But it quickly becomes absurd when they use fantasy figures like Bond to make a point. Bond's masculinity is not the only clash between his world and our society. After all, he kills people, too.

There is no use of the Bond trademark in this film. Featuring Dench and Daniel is not akin to the Bond brand. It may be to those that can only associate their work with one brand but not to the people trying to use irony and comedy to make an extremely valid point.

Both Craig and Dench are associated with Bond, no matter if we like it or not. And the line "aren't we double-oh-seven?" makes it kinda obvious...

Anyway, this has Barbara Broccoli written all over it and her "we demand that heroes fight their battles with better judgment" crap. I wish our producers could show a better judgment and not sell Bond as PC-doll to the first bidder.

I think it is absurd to mix fictional characters into a social debate like this. The discussion in this thread has absolutely nothing to do with gender equality so the argument "see, they provoke and succeed" is pointless. What kind of message are they trying to send with this political correctness? It is ok for a man to kill people... as long as he doesn't smoke and as long as he show respect to women along the way? And why stop with gender equality? With a growing environmental awareness, is it ok for Bond to drive a 6.0 Litre V12 car? This is why I think it is bizarre to mix fantasy characters into the real social debate - you don’t really know where to draw the line. It is perfectly fine for Brad Pitt’s character to carve a swastika into someone’s forehead in "Inglourious Basterds", but male chauvinism in a Bond movie is totally out of the question. Proportions, anyone?

[Matt_13]

This is utterly ridiculous and a misuse of the Bond-Trademark.

I respect the discussion about gender equality. But it quickly becomes absurd when they use fantasy figures like Bond to make a point. Bond's masculinity is not the only clash between his world and our society. After all, he kills people, too.

There is no use of the Bond trademark in this film. Featuring Dench and Daniel is not akin to the Bond brand. It may be to those that can only associate their work with one brand but not to the people trying to use irony and comedy to make an extremely valid point.

Both Craig and Dench are associated with Bond, no matter if we like it or not. And the line "aren't we double-oh-seven?" makes it kinda obvious...

Anyway, this has Barbara Broccoli written all over it and her "we demand that heroes fight their battles with better judgment" crap. I wish our producers could show a better judgment and not sell Bond as PC-doll to the first bidder.

I think it is absurd to mix fictional characters into a social debate like this. The discussion in this thread has absolutely nothing to do with gender equality so the argument "see, they provoke and succeed" is pointless. What kind of message are they trying to send with this political correctness? It is ok for a man to kill people... as long as he doesn't smoke and as long as he show respect to women along the way? And why stop with gender equality? With a growing environmental awareness, is it ok for Bond to drive a 6.0 Litre V12 car? This is why I think it is bizarre to mix fantasy characters into the real social debate - you don’t really know where to draw the line. It is perfectly fine for Brad Pitt’s character to carve a swastika into someone’s forehead in "Inglourious Basterds", but male chauvinism in a Bond movie is totally out of the question. Proportions, anyone?

......Daniel Craig is best known for his role as Bond. He clearly wanted to be involved in this cause. They used a SINGULAR ASPECT of the character (ie the sexism) and used it as a vessel for discussing the topic. Daniel Craig is a male icon now. Having what some may consider the epitome of masculinity throw in his support for women's rights in such a shocking way helps to emphasize the campaign's importance and relevance (in other words, it gives it attention that it otherwise would not have). Dragging up the subject of killing or smoking when they simply used Craig's image as Bond to help promote gender equality is kind of hilarious. Why does it matter to you so much? Craig took part in a commercial for a good cause, and you're desperately trying to find fault with it! This isn't about James Bond for goodness sake. James Bond isn't real. What is discussed in this advert is, and if it takes the use of the Bond image to allow Craig to shed some light on it, by God let them! Christ guys, get a life.

[Napoleon Solo]

Here's the press release associated with the video (which is also going to be shown in theaters:)

http://www.weareequa...dia-Release.pdf

Excerpt:

//In the film ‘M’ interrogates Bond with a series of searching questions on gender
issues, from pay inequality to domestic violence. ‘M’ asks: “For someone with such a
fondness for women, I wonder if you’ve ever considered what it means to be one?”
Bond then appears in a blonde wig, a dress and women’s shoes, in a sequence that
is both highly emotional and deeply disturbing. As he/she stands silent, Dench
continues to read a list of brutal statistics relating to the role of women and their
treatment in our society.//

Craig and Dench are playing Bond and M.

//The film was commissioned by EQUALS, a coalition of charities and organisations
brought together by Annie Lennox to step up the call for equality between men and
women. Produced by Barbara Broccoli, the woman behind box-office hits ‘Casino
Royale’, ‘Quantum of Solace’ and the forthcoming ‘Bond 23’, and shot by Oscarnominated
cinematographer Seamus McGarvey, the film will be released at midday
on Monday 7 March to mark the centenary of International Women’s Day the
following day.//

And Barbara Broccoli produced it.

[Iroquois]

This is utterly ridiculous and a misuse of the Bond-Trademark.

I respect the discussion about gender equality. But it quickly becomes absurd when they use fantasy figures like Bond to make a point. Bond's masculinity is not the only clash between his world and our society. After all, he kills people, too.

There is no use of the Bond trademark in this film. Featuring Dench and Daniel is not akin to the Bond brand. It may be to those that can only associate their work with one brand but not to the people trying to use irony and comedy to make an extremely valid point.

Both Craig and Dench are associated with Bond, no matter if we like it or not. And the line "aren't we double-oh-seven?" makes it kinda obvious...

Anyway, this has Barbara Broccoli written all over it and her "we demand that heroes fight their battles with better judgment" crap. I wish our producers could show a better judgment and not sell Bond as PC-doll to the first bidder.

I think it is absurd to mix fictional characters into a social debate like this. The discussion in this thread has absolutely nothing to do with gender equality so the argument "see, they provoke and succeed" is pointless. What kind of message are they trying to send with this political correctness? It is ok for a man to kill people... as long as he doesn't smoke and as long as he show respect to women along the way? And why stop with gender equality? With a growing environmental awareness, is it ok for Bond to drive a 6.0 Litre V12 car? This is why I think it is bizarre to mix fantasy characters into the real social debate - you don’t really know where to draw the line. It is perfectly fine for Brad Pitt’s character to carve a swastika into someone’s forehead in "Inglourious Basterds", but male chauvinism in a Bond movie is totally out of the question. Proportions, anyone?

......Daniel Craig is best known for his role as Bond. He clearly wanted to be involved in this cause. They used a SINGULAR ASPECT of the character (ie the sexism) and used it as a vessel for discussing the topic. Daniel Craig is a male icon now. Having what some may consider the epitome of masculinity throw in his support for women's rights in such a shocking way helps to emphasize the campaign's importance and relevance (in other words, it gives it attention that it otherwise would not have). Dragging up the subject of killing or smoking when they simply used Craig's image as Bond to help promote gender equality is kind of hilarious. Why does it matter to you so much? Craig took part in a commercial for a good cause, and you're desperately trying to find fault with it! This isn't about James Bond for goodness sake. James Bond isn't real. What is discussed in this advert is, and if it takes the use of the Bond image to allow Craig to shed some light on it, by God let them! Christ guys, get a life.

Well said. It's a shame that some are complaining about a very creative and fun way to spread a good message.

Anyway, I've given my opinion on how I think it's great and, although it's not about Bond, it's good for the character too. I shall leave it at that

[General G.]

[Binyamin]

You are all clearly insecure and a bit childish. Man up or shut up. That's going on a tshirt.

Those who disagree about the video are "insecure and childish?" Ah, and if I don't believe it was necessary for Daniel Craig to to put on a dress, I'm not a "man" and I have to "shut up."

Progressivism and tolerance is great, until you have to tolerate somebody *elses* pesky opinion, eh Matt_13?

There are some members who are over-reacting. Address your insults to them, not to everybody who happens to disagrees with you.

I dislike the video. I find it demeaning toward MEN, suggesting that somehow I have to wear a dress or be labelled as uncaring. It is a publicity stunt, politically charged, that cashes in on fast shock value instead of class, discussion, and mature debate.

That is my opinion. If you disagree, fine. But do not call me insecure and childish, or less of a man. Doing so reeks of pure hypocrisy.

[Matt_13]

You are all clearly insecure and a bit childish. Man up or shut up. That's going on a tshirt.

Those who disagree about the video are "insecure and childish?" Ah, and if I don't believe it was necessary for Daniel Craig to to put on a dress, I'm not a "man" and I have to "shut up."

Progressivism and tolerance is great, until you have to tolerate somebody *elses* pesky opinion, eh Matt_13?

There are some members who are over-reacting. Address your insults to them, not to everybody who happens to disagrees with you.

I dislike the video. I find it demeaning toward MEN, suggesting that somehow I have to wear a dress or be labelled as uncaring. It is a publicity stunt, politically charged, that cashes in on fast shock value instead of class, discussion, and mature debate.

That is my opinion. If you disagree, fine. But do not call me insecure and childish, or less of a man. Doing so reeks of pure hypocrisy.

I think it was pretty obvious that my post was targeted at select persons champ. I never once said it was wrong to disagree with the video. What I said was that the different reasons for its supposed awfulness that have been offered up by those who oppose it are childish. Feminizing Bond? Emasculating Craig? An insult to the brand? Honestly? It's a ing ad for a good cause. If it makes you uncomfortable fine, I obviously can't judge you for that, but noone should be insulting Daniel or anyone else involved for trying to bring about discussion for gender equality. And you know damn well a "mature debate" without such stunts would go nowhere. Not nearly as many people would be inclined to discuss this issue without such publicity. Pick your arguments. Having been chased around this board by conservative jackoffs who disagree with my viewpoints, waiting until midnight and hitting -1 on all of my posts past and present, I think I'm certainly in a position to say that noone has the right to judge another based off of their own points of view. What I can do, however, is call out those who offer up immature reasoning that insults others trying to do some good. So my advice stands for those it concerns. Unless you would have the confidence to put yourself in such a disarming position to promote a positive issue, you have no right to insult those who do. I do hope that's specific enough for you.

[Zorin Industries]

This is utterly ridiculous and a misuse of the Bond-Trademark.

I respect the discussion about gender equality. But it quickly becomes absurd when they use fantasy figures like Bond to make a point. Bond's masculinity is not the only clash between his world and our society. After all, he kills people, too.

There is no use of the Bond trademark in this film. Featuring Dench and Daniel is not akin to the Bond brand. It may be to those that can only associate their work with one brand but not to the people trying to use irony and comedy to make an extremely valid point.

Both Craig and Dench are associated with Bond, no matter if we like it or not. And the line "aren't we double-oh-seven?" makes it kinda obvious...

Anyway, this has Barbara Broccoli written all over it and her "we demand that heroes fight their battles with better judgment" crap. I wish our producers could show a better judgment and not sell Bond as PC-doll to the first bidder.

I think it is absurd to mix fictional characters into a social debate like this. The discussion in this thread has absolutely nothing to do with gender equality so the argument "see, they provoke and succeed" is pointless. What kind of message are they trying to send with this political correctness? It is ok for a man to kill people... as long as he doesn't smoke and as long as he show respect to women along the way? And why stop with gender equality? With a growing environmental awareness, is it ok for Bond to drive a 6.0 Litre V12 car? This is why I think it is bizarre to mix fantasy characters into the real social debate - you don’t really know where to draw the line. It is perfectly fine for Brad Pitt’s character to carve a swastika into someone’s forehead in "Inglourious Basterds", but male chauvinism in a Bond movie is totally out of the question. Proportions, anyone?

Bond has not been "sold". I hate to burst your little bubble but the Broccolis do not need to make money from the Bond brand and to suggest that in light of this ad is so off the mark it would be laughable if the issues at stake were so un-laughable. Furthermore, the Bond HQ does a hell of a lot for charitable causes that no-one has a clue about. They can do what they want when they want.

And no-one involved with Bond would have receieved a penny for their time on this ad.

This ad is not politically correct. It is not about that and you have missed the point. I doubt you really know what that means and throw it into the argument to satisfy your see-through rhetoric.

Just because Daniel Craig is in a 007 esque suit and Dench is narrating (and even refers to him loosely as 007) does not mean or imply that the figure in the ad is James Bond 007. Have you heard of irony?

You talk about blurring the lines between so-called reality and fictional characters but the only blurring of any lines is in your opinion, not that of a cleverly compiled video used to highlight wider, deeper issues with humour, anti-humour and current cultural touchstones.

[FLEMINGFAN]

An ugly man certainly makes for an ugly woman!

[AMC Hornet]

What impressed me about this vid is how DC's dignity and quiet determination - like that of the woman he portrays - carries through from beginning to end. As far as dialogue goes, this is truly a case of less is more. The way he pulls off the wig at the end intimates to me that being a woman in this world is one 'role of honour' that even 007 hasn't the fortitude to tackle.

So crucify me for not being up in arms over the 'selling out' or 'emasculating' of the 007 brand, just because DC was man enough to stand in support of equality.

P.S.: you'll see captures from this vid in next week's tabloids, with headlines shouting "Shocking Scenes of 007 in Drag from Bond 23!" and other such misleading nonsense (rather like the way the tabloids showed pictures of Roger Moore from 'ffolkes' and claimed that 007 would be a bearded, whiskey-swilling, needlepointing cat-lover in FYEO). But calm down: none of this will harm the franchise - all it will do is send people to YT to see what all the fuss is about (you can't buy this kind of publicity).

Edited by AMC Hornet, 09 March 2011 - 10:24 PM.