303 replies to this topic

[Binyamin]

And you know damn well a "mature debate" without such stunts would go nowhere.

On the contrary, the publicity stunt of having Daniel Craig wearing a dress and earrings is stifling constructive discussion, not helping it.

This forum thread is a perfect example -- it is full of strong opinions about the VIDEO, but not any actual discussion of the underlying gender equality questions.

That, it seems to me, is the problem with this: It is designed to draw attention to ITSELF, and to Daniel Craig, and to make the organizers feel smug about themselves instead of truly furthering the cause and creating positive debate. To me, it misses the mark and derails an otherwise worthy discussion.

Edited by Binyamin, 08 March 2011 - 10:27 PM.

[Matt_13]

And you know damn well a "mature debate" without such stunts would go nowhere.

On the contrary, the publicity stunt of having Daniel Craig wearing a dress and earrings is stifling constructive discussion, not helping it.

This forum thread is a perfect example -- it is full of strong opinions about the VIDEO, but not any actual discussion of the underlying gender equality questions.

That, it seems to me, is the problem with this: It is designed to draw attention to ITSELF, and to Daniel Craig, and to make the organizers feel smug about themselves instead of truly furthering the cause and creating positive debate. To me, it misses the mark and derails an otherwise worthy discussion.

And there is a reasonable criticism at last. Still one I don't agree with, but it's miles better than "Daniel Craig is ugly."

[BJMDDS]

In spite of shilling for Eon, it's nice to see many here oppose whatever Eon throws out to the media. Since when does M wear the pants and Bond wear the panties? You can applaud this disgusting Bond representation in the name of women's rights all you want to, but it is now entrenched in the memories of those who enjoy the franchise and the future promotion of Danielle Cr-egg as Bond will be a mockery. With a specimen like Jackman out there, how can this charade be allowed to continue.
That is exactly the direction Eon has taken since 2005 and it's time for the not so divine Ms. Broccoli to step aside and let MGW guide the franchise. At least he does not have a crush on the lead actor, but after this video, who knows now? The new owners may have a lot to say after this new video fiasco.

Edited by BJMDDS, 08 March 2011 - 11:12 PM.

[Garth007]

In spite of shilling for Eon, it's nice to see many here oppose whatever Eon throws out to the media. Since when does M wear the pants and Bond wear the panties? You can applaud this disgusting Bond representation in the name of women's rights all you want to, but it is now entrenched in the memories of those who enjoy the franchise and the future promotion of Danielle Cr-egg as Bond will be a mockery. With a specimen like Jackman out there, how can this charade be allowed to continue.
That is exactly the direction Eon has taken since 2005 and it's time for the not so divine Ms. Broccoli to step aside and let MGW guide the franchise. At least he does not have a crush on the lead actor, but after this video, who knows now? The new owners may have a lot to say after this new video fiasco.

Quit saying Jackman and this other guy u keep mentioning is going to be up for the next bond. Save that stuff for for which Bond 7 actor you want thread. You keep saying that those two are going to be one of the next bond when very clearly Daniel craig is still bond and isn't going anytime soon. Just because you don't like the video doesn't mean he is automatically not bond anymore so quit acting like that is the case. if you really don't like daniel craig as bond then get the hell of this website and go to Craignotbond.com bull crap site and join it cause me and everyone else is getting tired of you constently complaining how bad he is. yeah we know its your opinion, but to keep saying that he IS done as bond is a lie and crosses the line of opinion to flat out bullying by lie.

Edited by Garth007, 08 March 2011 - 11:20 PM.

[Napoleon Solo]

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?

Read the press release the group put out with the ad. It says, plainly and clearly, that Craig is playing Bond and Dench is playing M.

This is not a comment about the ad itself. But anybody who says Craig is not playing is ignoring the facts. As the old saying goes, you're entitled to your own arguments, you are not entitled to your own facts. The group says the actors are in character. She calls him "007" in the ad.

EDIT: Here's the text of the press release. Note that Barbara Broccoli is the producer of the ad:

JAMES BOND SUPPORTS INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S DAY
WeAreEQUALS – www.weareequals.org
WeAreEQUALS Blog – www.weareequals.org/blog
You Tube Link - www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkp4t5NYzVM
Embed Code: <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390"
src="http://www.youtube.c...ed/gkp4t5NYzVM" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>
The two-minute short, specially commissioned for International Women’s Day, sees
007 star Daniel Craig undergo a dramatic makeover as he puts himself, quite literally,
in a woman’s shoes.
Directed by acclaimed ‘Nowhere Boy’ director/conceptual artist Sam Taylor-Wood,
scripted by Jane Goldman (‘Kick ’) and featuring the voice of Dame Judi Dench
reprising her role as ‘M’, the film will be screened in cinemas and streamed online in
a bid to highlight the levels of inequality that persist between men and women in
the UK and worldwide. It is the first film featuring Bond to be directed by a woman.
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.
Sam Taylor-Wood said: “Bond is challenged by ‘M’ to think about gender inequality,
and I hope that the film encourages viewers to do the same. Despite great
advances in women’s rights, statistics show that when it comes to the balance of
power between the sexes, equality is far from being a global reality. As ‘M’ reminds
Bond, facing up to gender issues and the sometimes covert nature of sexism in the
21st century is something that we all have to recognise, confront and challenge.”
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.
EQUALS spokeswoman Esme Peach said: “We are thrilled that Sam Taylor-Wood,
Daniel Craig, Dame Judi Dench and such a prestigious production team agreed to
create this powerful short film for EQUALS. We feel it is crucial to involve men in the
movement for women’s rights and EQUALS is about men and women working
together for positive change. So who better to convey that message than the
partnership of Bond and ‘M’, two iconic British characters with global appeal and
influence – and who better to conceive and direct the film than Sam Taylor-Wood,
an artist and film-maker whose work is questioning, often provocative and deeply
moving?”
The film can be viewed at www.weareequals.org from midday Monday 7 March.
Online previews are available for the press.
For further details please contact:
Esme Peach, EQUALS project coordinator
T: 07973 273 708
E: [email protected], [email protected]
On 7 March and beyond:
Sally Turner, Media Coordinator, EQUALS
T: 07803 334472
E: [email protected]
www.weareequals.org
Notes to editors:
The cast and crew have donated their time and services pro-bono to the project, to
help promote discussion and action around these crucial issues.
The film will receive its cinema premiere at the Birds Eye View Film Festival at the BFI
Southbank on International Women’s Day, 8 March.
http://www.birds-eye-view.co.uk
For BEV enquiries, please contact Elizabeth
Benjamin: [email protected]

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

Read the press release the group put out with the ad. It says, plainly and clearly, that Craig is playing Bond and Dench is playing M.

This is not a comment about the ad itself. But anybody who says Craig is not playing is ignoring the facts. As the old saying goes, you're entitled to your own arguments, you are not entitled to your own facts. The group says the actors are in character. She calls him "007" in the ad.

Yes, but it's a tongue in cheek 007 - a version of Bond for the purposes of the video. I doubt Craig's cinematic Bond would dress in drag and that's kind of the point really - for me anyway - namely have Craig do something he's never gonna do for the Bond series, all in the name of raising awareness for the campaign. I also think it's as much about Craig as an actor as it is the 007 character. Furthermore, as I said earlier, there is no tuxedo, gun, 007logo or Bond theme here.

[Loomis]

On the contrary, the publicity stunt of having Daniel Craig wearing a dress and earrings is stifling constructive discussion, not helping it. ... That, it seems to me, is the problem with this: It is designed to draw attention to ITSELF, and to Daniel Craig, and to make the organizers feel smug about themselves instead of truly furthering the cause and creating positive debate. To me, it misses the mark and derails an otherwise worthy discussion.

Interesting points.

[Napoleon Solo]

Read the press release the group put out with the ad. It says, plainly and clearly, that Craig is playing Bond and Dench is playing M.

This is not a comment about the ad itself. But anybody who says Craig is not playing is ignoring the facts. As the old saying goes, you're entitled to your own arguments, you are not entitled to your own facts. The group says the actors are in character. She calls him "007" in the ad.

Yes, but it's a tongue in cheek 007 - a version of Bond for the purposes of the video. I doubt Craig's cinematic Bond would dress in drag and that's kind of the point really - for me anyway - namely have Craig do something he's never gonna do for the Bond series, all in the name of raising awareness for the campaign. I also think it's as much about Craig as an actor as it is the 007 character. Furthermore, as I said earlier, there is no tuxedo, gun, 007logo or Bond theme here.

Some people (and it's a few, most of the debate concerns other issues) are denying Craig is playing Bond in any way, shape or form. If you want to say it's a tongue in cheek 007, fine. But some of the posters are in denial about the obvious. That's what I am addressing.

Barbara Broccoli is the producer of the video. She likely would have had to sign off on the press release and the press release says it what it says.

[Binyamin]

I've been thinking about what bothers and annoys me so much about this EQUALS movement. Here it is:

It is so superficial. It is all hype and no substance.


For example, these are direct quotes taken from the website:

1. "When a woman can have fun and not be branded a slag."

2. "When we can all relax in the workplace."

3. "When my playlist gets valued not vetoed!"

4. "When men and women both wear skirts and it's not weird!"


Relaxing at work? PLAYLISTS? Men wearing skirts?

In parts of the world, there are REAL inequality issues with women. Female circumcision in the Middle East. Sex slavery in Asia. Zero education in Africa. And the website is worried about SKIRTS AND PLAYLISTS?

It's self-righteous and silly. Again, this particular campaign seems to be about feeling good, feeling "edgy," and apparently getting men to wear skirts. That is a stated goal on the website. Apparently it is more important than making an actual difference.

[FLEMINGFAN]

I've been thinking about what bothers and annoys me so much about this EQUALS movement. Here it is:

It is so superficial. It is all hype and no substance.


For example, these are direct quotes taken from the website:

1. "When a woman can have fun and not be branded a slag."

2. "When we can all relax in the workplace."

3. "When my playlist gets valued not vetoed!"

4. "When men and women both wear skirts and it's not weird!"


Relaxing at work? PLAYLISTS? Men wearing skirts?

In parts of the world, there are REAL inequality issues with women. Female circumcision in the Middle East. Sex slavery in Asia. Zero education in Africa. And the website is worried about SKIRTS AND PLAYLISTS?

It's self-righteous and silly. Again, this particular campaign seems to be about feeling good, feeling "edgy," and apparently getting men to wear skirts. That is a stated goal on the website. Apparently it is more important than making an actual difference.

Wonderfully stated.

It is almost as if the ad was made in the early 70's.

Since Ms. magazine pretty much acknowledged, some time ago, that equality now exists in the major workplaces (as long as there are human beings, one can never get rid of it ALL), this whole ad seems so silly and almost insulting to the modern, intelligent woman.

Once again, 'Hollywood' patting itself on the back, and light-years behind reality.

[jaguar007]

As I said earlier, the video is for shock value because having James Bond dressed in drag does absolutely nothing to promote equality for women. What it does do is get us to remember this video and discuss it. Where they misfired is that we are discussing James Bond in a dress and what it does to Bond, not women's rights.

However it is just an ad and I am not taking it seriously as far as a Bond movie.

[Loomis]

I've been thinking about what bothers and annoys me so much about this EQUALS movement. Here it is:

It is so superficial. It is all hype and no substance.


For example, these are direct quotes taken from the website:

1. "When a woman can have fun and not be branded a slag."

2. "When we can all relax in the workplace."

3. "When my playlist gets valued not vetoed!"

4. "When men and women both wear skirts and it's not weird!"

Good grief. How patronising. And also nonsensical - I mean, if your "playlist" (whatever that means - forgive me, I'm a dinosaur in my late thirties) is being vetoed, it may well be because of your crap taste in music rather than your gender. And workplaces are generally not supposed to be places of relaxation for anyone, male or female.

[jaguar007]

4. "When men and women both wear skirts and it's not weird!"

[Binyamin]

And workplaces are generally not supposed to be places of relaxation for anyone, male or female.

Exactly. People like this complain about the hard, competitive nature of work and business, campaign to turn the workplace into a social club for "relaxing," and then can't figure out why they are less successful than their ultra-competitive male counterparts.

It becomes a cycle of complaining. Not always. But often.

[jaguar007]

The problem with this video as a message is that it empowers the woman by having Bond (the man) dressed as a woman rather than having the woman doing something powerful on her own. It is sort of self defeating as if to say men need to be reduced for equality rather than women moved up for equality.

[Binyamin]

The problem with this video as a message is that it empowers the woman by having Bond (the man) dressed as a woman rather than having the woman doing something powerful on her own. It is sort of self defeating as if to say men need to be reduced for equality rather than women moved up for equality.

Right. It confuses "equally valuable as people," which men and women are, with "exactly the same," which men and women are not and will never be. Why not celebrate the unique strengths of women and also the unique strengths of men, instead of pretending that wearing the same clothes is somehow a progressive solution?

[Wade]

Could we all just drop a pointless argument and forget "In Her Majesty's Secret Burka"? Or "Ogrepussy"?

[BJMDDS]

You would never see Hugh Jackman or Henry Cavill portrayed in this fashion. Brocolli has done permanent damage to Cr-egg's mystique as Bond. There is no positive spin to this. Heads might start to roll at Eon after such a fiasco. It was insulting to everything Cubby Brocolli stood for. Where is MGW through all of this?

[Garth007]

You would never see Hugh Jackman or Henry Cavill portrayed in this fashion. Brocolli has done permanent damage to Cr-egg's mystique as Bond. There is no positive spin to this. Heads might start to roll at Eon after such a fiasco. It was insulting to everything Cubby Brocolli stood for. Where is MGW through all of this?

Quit saying Jackman and this other guy u keep mentioning is going to be up for the next bond. Save that stuff for for which Bond 7 actor you want thread. You keep saying that those two are going to be one of the next bond when very clearly Daniel craig is still bond and isn't going anytime soon. Just because you don't like the video doesn't mean he is automatically not bond anymore so quit acting like that is the case. if you really don't like daniel craig as bond then get the hell of this website and go to Craignotbond.com bull crap site and join it cause me and everyone else is getting tired of you constently complaining how bad he is. yeah we know its your opinion, but to keep saying that he IS done as bond is a lie and crosses the line of opinion to flat out bullying by lie.

[SecretAgentFan]

You would never see Hugh Jackman or Henry Cavill portrayed in this fashion. Brocolli has done permanent damage to Cr-egg's mystique as Bond. There is no positive spin to this. Heads might start to roll at Eon after such a fiasco. It was insulting to everything Cubby Brocolli stood for. Where is MGW through all of this?

"Permanent damage? No positive spin?"

You´re right. The only possible reaction to this is for you to go ahead and leave the franchise´s fanbase.


"Heads might start to roll at Eon?"

Absolutely. Barbara Broccoli will surely fire herself.


"Where is MGW through all of this?"

Yeah, right, a man should be in charge of this debate.

[Germanlady]

I think, all those, who don't act like crazy Bond fanboys might get the message and from what I read everywhere - the positive response is way in the majority. Get over yourseloves. Its getting ridiculous.

[Jump James]

For me, it's now cannon, and I have burnt off a copy and put it next to Quantum of Solace. I'll let everyone know how it scores with the others after this weekends Bondathon.

[Jim]

The problem with this video as a message is that it empowers the woman by having Bond (the man) dressed as a woman rather than having the woman doing something powerful on her own. It is sort of self defeating as if to say men need to be reduced for equality rather than women moved up for equality.

Right. It confuses "equally valuable as people," which men and women are, with "exactly the same," which men and women are not and will never be. Why not celebrate the unique strengths of women and also the unique strengths of men, instead of pretending that wearing the same clothes is somehow a progressive solution?

That's an interesting perspective.

You would never see Hugh Jackman or Henry Cavill portrayed in this fashion. Brocolli has done permanent damage to Cr-egg's mystique as Bond. There is no positive spin to this. Heads might start to roll at Eon after such a fiasco. It was insulting to everything Cubby Brocolli stood for. Where is MGW through all of this?

That, however, isn't.

[dinovelvet]

You would never see Hugh Jackman or Henry Cavill portrayed in this fashion. Brocolli has done permanent damage to Cr-egg's mystique as Bond. There is no positive spin to this. Heads might start to roll at Eon after such a fiasco. It was insulting to everything Cubby Brocolli stood for.

http://27.media.tumb...aqddyo1_500.png

Edited by Jim, 11 March 2011 - 08:58 PM.
Eon copyright material - we can't use it here

[Zorin Industries]

You would never see Hugh Jackman or Henry Cavill portrayed in this fashion. Brocolli has done permanent damage to Cr-egg's mystique as Bond. There is no positive spin to this. Heads might start to roll at Eon after such a fiasco. It was insulting to everything Cubby Brocolli stood for. Where is MGW through all of this?

Are you remotely serious about this?

I hate to tell you but Eon Productions are not just in the business of making James Bond films for blinkered fans. They do a hell of a lot more with their time, clout and coffers. As for heads rolling at Eon - I suggest you stick with watching Bond films and not remotely understanding the lives and motivations of those that make them.

[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?

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.

You get too personal for your own good. Perhaps user’s life and motivation are more interesting than the actual topic?

Once again, 'Hollywood' patting itself on the back, and light-years behind reality.

[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.

You get too personal for your own good. Perhaps user’s life and motivation are more interesting than the actual topic?

Not in this instance - on both counts.

[BJMDDS]

You would never see Hugh Jackman or Henry Cavill portrayed in this fashion. Brocolli has done permanent damage to Cr-egg's mystique as Bond. There is no positive spin to this. Heads might start to roll at Eon after such a fiasco. It was insulting to everything Cubby Brocolli stood for.

http://27.media.tumb...aqddyo1_500.png

Blowfeld in drag as a disguise in 1971 is fine in DAF. Thst's not Jackman or Cavill. The 21st century Bond portrayed as an ugly transvestite being belittled by the voice of the current female M is another issue. I can guarantee you the next M will be a male actor and Eon's new partners will have a lot more input into the 7th 007 than any prior Bond film made to date.

[BJMDDS]

You would never see Hugh Jackman or Henry Cavill portrayed in this fashion. Brocolli has done permanent damage to Cr-egg's mystique as Bond. There is no positive spin to this. Heads might start to roll at Eon after such a fiasco. It was insulting to everything Cubby Brocolli stood for. Where is MGW through all of this?

Are you remotely serious about this?

I hate to tell you but Eon Productions are not just in the business of making James Bond films for blinkered fans. They do a hell of a lot more with their time, clout and coffers. As for heads rolling at Eon - I suggest you stick with watching Bond films and not remotely understanding the lives and motivations of those that make them.

They do spend time on other projects, like their Broadway attempt to make Cr-egg look good with popular Hugh Jackman in the lead role. They seem hell bent on destroying a historic franchise, that's for sure.

[doublenoughtspy]

Nikki Finke, the editor & publisher of Deadline Hollywood, calls it "The very definition of ill-advised"

http://www.deadline....-terrible-idea/

I'm not saying that her voice is the most important, but it is interesting to hear that a very powerful female voice in Hollywood thinks it is a bad idea.

Obviously the video has shock value, but I don't think it succeeds in conveying the message to the audience it hopes to reform: misogynistic men.

"Oh, after seeing Daniel Craig in drag, I'll no longer make dick jokes and demean women." Right.