303 replies to this topic

[Napoleon Solo]

This is the point I'm making. If you compare the two, you realise they go against each other. THAT'S why Craig is not ACTUALLY 007 here. It goes against his portrayal as Bond as someone who would never agree to dress in drag. That's it, it's irony. You think it's Bond until he does something that he would never do and then you realise it's just a gag and that Craig is not playing Bond at all.

Except the press release says he's playing James Bond and Judi Dench is playing M. Barbara Broccoli was the producer of the ad. She probably would have been shown a draft of the press release before it was distributed (that's typically how public relations work). Again, I'm not weighing in on the arguments whether the ad is good or bad. But Craig is playing Bond in the ad.

Once again, here is the URL for the press release: http://www.weareequa...dia-Release.pdf

Once again, here's some of the text:

///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.//// (emphasis added)

More from the release:

//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.///

You can argue it's a good cause, you can argue that this portrayal Bond by Craig varies from his two film performances. You can argue this sort of thing has been done before (i.e. the 1974 Batman PSA for the U.S. Labor Department).

But you can't say Craig isn't playing James Bond in the ad, at least not without ignoring signficant facts.

[Iroquois]

This is the point I'm making. If you compare the two, you realise they go against each other. THAT'S why Craig is not ACTUALLY 007 here. It goes against his portrayal as Bond as someone who would never agree to dress in drag. That's it, it's irony. You think it's Bond until he does something that he would never do and then you realise it's just a gag and that Craig is not playing Bond at all.

Except the press release says he's playing James Bond and Judi Dench is playing M. Barbara Broccoli was the producer of the ad. She probably would have been shown a draft of the press release before it was distributed (that's typically how public relations work). Again, I'm not weighing in on the arguments whether the ad is good or bad. But Craig is playing Bond in the ad.

Once again, here is the URL for the press release: http://www.weareequa...dia-Release.pdf

Once again, here's some of the text:

///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.//// (emphasis added)

More from the release:

//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.///

You can argue it's a good cause, you can argue that this portrayal Bond by Craig varies from his two film performances. You can argue this sort of thing has been done before (i.e. the 1974 Batman PSA for the U.S. Labor Department).

But you can't say Craig isn't playing James Bond in the ad, at least not without ignoring signficant facts.

Maybe I've not worded my point properly then, and if so I apologize, it's kind of like trying to describe how you know 2+2=4. I'll give it another go.

The Fact that the video only works with a contrast between the Bond we see here and the Bond we see in the films means that there is a profound difference between the two portrayals. Therefore, Craig is playing a different version of Bond to the Bond we see in the films. As such the "Bond" we see here has no bearing on the Bond of the films.

When I say Craig isn't playing Bond here, I mean he isn't playing OUR Bond. He isn't playing the Bond we know and love from CR and QOS.

I'm using this point to basically say there is no need for this video to have an effect on the other proper Bond.

I hope this makes sense.

[Napoleon Solo]

This is the point I'm making. If you compare the two, you realise they go against each other. THAT'S why Craig is not ACTUALLY 007 here. It goes against his portrayal as Bond as someone who would never agree to dress in drag. That's it, it's irony. You think it's Bond until he does something that he would never do and then you realise it's just a gag and that Craig is not playing Bond at all.

Except the press release says he's playing James Bond and Judi Dench is playing M. Barbara Broccoli was the producer of the ad. She probably would have been shown a draft of the press release before it was distributed (that's typically how public relations work). Again, I'm not weighing in on the arguments whether the ad is good or bad. But Craig is playing Bond in the ad.

Once again, here is the URL for the press release: http://www.weareequa...dia-Release.pdf

Once again, here's some of the text:

///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.//// (emphasis added)

More from the release:

//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.///

You can argue it's a good cause, you can argue that this portrayal Bond by Craig varies from his two film performances. You can argue this sort of thing has been done before (i.e. the 1974 Batman PSA for the U.S. Labor Department).

But you can't say Craig isn't playing James Bond in the ad, at least not without ignoring signficant facts.

Maybe I've not worded my point properly then, and if so I apologize, it's kind of like trying to describe how you know 2+2=4. I'll give it another go.

The Fact that the video only works with a contrast between the Bond we see here and the Bond we see in the films means that there is a profound difference between the two portrayals. Therefore, Craig is playing a different version of Bond to the Bond we see in the films. As such the "Bond" we see here has no bearing on the Bond of the films.

When I say Craig isn't playing Bond here, I mean he isn't playing OUR Bond. He isn't playing the Bond we know and love from CR and QOS.

I'm using this point to basically say there is no need for this video to have an effect on the other proper Bond.

I hope this makes sense.

That makes sense. There are had been other posts in this thread saying flat out that Craig wasn't playing Bond. I apologize for jumping on your post too hard. That's the problem with message boards; you don't get the chance to immediately clarify, discuss, etc.

[jaguar007]

The thing to consider is that the things M says to Bond, in the manner she says them is because he is sexist. He does not say anything to contradict this.

Then M says after saying something how fond he is of women "have you ever considered what it would be like to be a woman"

Then we see Bond dressed as a woman. This does not mean that the Bond we know and love from the movies is now dressing up as a woman, it means he is considering or imagining if you will, what it is like to be a woman.

At least that is the way I care to view the film.

[Matt_13]

Gravity...this is getting way over the top. I literally have nothing against you. For goodness sake I don't even know you, and even if I did I sincerely doubt politics would affect my view of you. But honestly, your tone is off and the arguments put forth by many new posters on this thread are malicious and uncalled for. We're all kind of antsy for some real news about the next film but seriously, the volatile rhetoric has to stop. So what if someone disagrees with you? Don't insult them for it, and don't insult other people for doing what they think is right. We're all fans of this character, but that doesn't mean we should feel possessive of him, especially not Craig. Ease up.

And for the record I don't try to moderate. I don't want to see members banned for having spirited debates. More often than not, especially when politics are involved, those debates turn personal, and since this site is an important outlet for a lot of us (for better or worse) it'd be a shame to get tossed from it. As such, I ask for threads to get closed when I feel things are going nowhere and the only ideas flying around are intended to hurt feelings. That said, only Binyamin has really offered up a reasonable criticism of this ad, and one that I literally could not appropriately counter. So far, all I'm seeing is a repeat of 2006 (Craig is ugly/insulting the brand etc). I'm willing to bet you'll segment this post like all my previous ones and take the time to point out all that's wrong with what I'm saying, and I'm fine with that. Don't take jabs at people for not agreeing with you, though. Offer a POV, but don't insult others for having different ideas. It's not called for, especially on here. Have at it.

[Germanlady]

Maybe the ignore buttom would be appropriate for Gravity. He's always been like this - ugly and insulting - so nothing new.
From what I see, the people in the vast majority like and applaud the vid. Nothing more I need to know. People should be proud. To me it looks like their own masculinity feels threatened. Maybe so ... think about it. Neither Bond nor DC need to have these concerns. Good for them.

[Iroquois]

Maybe I've not worded my point properly then, and if so I apologize, it's kind of like trying to describe how you know 2+2=4. I'll give it another go.

The Fact that the video only works with a contrast between the Bond we see here and the Bond we see in the films means that there is a profound difference between the two portrayals. Therefore, Craig is playing a different version of Bond to the Bond we see in the films. As such the "Bond" we see here has no bearing on the Bond of the films.

When I say Craig isn't playing Bond here, I mean he isn't playing OUR Bond. He isn't playing the Bond we know and love from CR and QOS.

I'm using this point to basically say there is no need for this video to have an effect on the other proper Bond.

I hope this makes sense.

That makes sense. There are had been other posts in this thread saying flat out that Craig wasn't playing Bond. I apologize for jumping on your post too hard. That's the problem with message boards; you don't get the chance to immediately clarify, discuss, etc.

No worries mate, I don't think I articulated very well anyway. But like I said, it's only a forum

The thing to consider is that the things M says to Bond, in the manner she says them is because he is sexist. He does not say anything to contradict this.

Then M says after saying something how fond he is of women "have you ever considered what it would be like to be a woman"

Then we see Bond dressed as a woman. This does not mean that the Bond we know and love from the movies is now dressing up as a woman, it means he is considering or imagining if you will, what it is like to be a woman.

At least that is the way I care to view the film.

Indeed, another perfectly valid way of looking at it.


At the end of the day I'm just hoping that people can stop taking the Bond aspect of the video so seriously. I thought it was pretty funny to be honest, I hardly thought about it until I came upon this thread haha.

[Zorin Industries]

This ad - that everyone involved is perfectly entitled to get involved with - has not caused the remotest controversy at all.

The Broccoli camp can do what they want with their character. The character of BOND has been theirs on film for half a century. It is their take, time and effort that has kept the Bond character on the world stage, not the books. Sorry. The Broccoli family - sometimes via Eon Productions and sometimes not - have always had great interest and in-roads into all sorts of charities. This is just the most recent. And it is one that is highlighting a genuine and serious issue with thought and creativity via a director, DOP and two cast members (Dench and Craig) who have great integrity. The nervousness of fans evidenced in this thread is some sort of weird forum nervousness - where fans make comment and scorn something for no other reason than they can. The real sadness that I can see is that so many folk who have slammed this film have done with blinkeredness, rudeness and a complete lack of understanding at what the issues being raised are all about. That is naive and selfish - but that is often the remit of film fans, sadly.

And as for "what would Fleming say"?. Well, Mr Ian F has not been involved with the series for nearly 50 years (and wasn't really for the few films he did see in production). The films are very separate from the literary world - in all sorts of ways, including creatively.

[jaguar007]

then there's a good chance that he'll change and be more like, well, a woman and that changes the series. And trust me, that's EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET. This character will be Jane Bond 007 in a few more years. It'll be recast at some point with a female.

Seriously, Bond will never be cast as a woman. Remember this is a one off 2 minute ad, I don't think we will see Bond being more feminized in the actual films. While it is true that since 95, the Bond films have become more PC, the point is that Bond in those films really has not. You can see his initial displeasure having to work with a woman (Vesper), his disobeying of M's orders (he rarely disobeyed Lee's M as much), his sexist sense of humor (You are Stephanie Broadchest),etc. No, while the movies as a whole may become more PC, I don't think we will really see the feminization of Bond (not any more than we did with Brosnan in the role).

[David Schofield]

then there's a good chance that he'll change and be more like, well, a woman and that changes the series. And trust me, that's EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET. This character will be Jane Bond 007 in a few more years. It'll be recast at some point with a female.

Seriously, Bond will never be cast as a woman. Remember this is a one off 2 minute ad, I don't think we will see Bond being more feminized in the actual films. While it is true that since 95, the Bond films have become more PC, the point is that Bond in those films really has not. You can see his initial displeasure having to work with a woman (Vesper), his disobeying of M's orders (he rarely disobeyed Lee's M as much), his sexist sense of humor (You are Stephanie Broadchest),etc. No, while the movies as a whole may become more PC, I don't think we will really see the feminization of Bond (not any more than we did with Brosnan in the role).

Jag, just out of interest, could you see Craig-Bond (or his successor, whoever that might be) actually dress up as a woman in a movie, to, say, go undercover, penetrate somewhere, etc?

Wonder what would be the general feeling about that?

[Germanlady]

then there's a good chance that he'll change and be more like, well, a woman and that changes the series. And trust me, that's EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET. This character will be Jane Bond 007 in a few more years. It'll be recast at some point with a female.

Seriously, Bond will never be cast as a woman. Remember this is a one off 2 minute ad, I don't think we will see Bond being more feminized in the actual films. While it is true that since 95, the Bond films have become more PC, the point is that Bond in those films really has not. You can see his initial displeasure having to work with a woman (Vesper), his disobeying of M's orders (he rarely disobeyed Lee's M as much), his sexist sense of humor (You are Stephanie Broadchest),etc. No, while the movies as a whole may become more PC, I don't think we will really see the feminization of Bond (not any more than we did with Brosnan in the role).

People really even give serious replies to this - intended - crap. Why is that? To make gravity happy?

[Matt_13]

Matty_13 wrote:

Gravity...this is getting way over the top. I literally have nothing against you.

I have no idea what you are talking about. "Over the top?" I'm entitled to my opinion about why I don't like this video. What I don't undestand is why you take it so personally? You act as if my problem with Barbara is with you. If the criticism isn't directed at you, and it doesn't apply, then quit hollering about it.

Matty_13 continued:

the volatile rhetoric has to stop. So what if someone disagrees with you? Don't insult them for it, and don't insult other people for doing what they think is right. We're all fans of this character, but that doesn't mean we should feel possessive of him, especially not Craig. Ease up.

Find me an example where I insulted someone because of their views? Furthermore, who are you to cast stones? You're one of the worst offenders when it comes to impolite discourse, so before removing the splinter out of my eye, remove the rafter out of yours.

Matty_13 continued:

As such, I ask for threads to get closed when I feel things are going nowhere and the only ideas flying around are intended to hurt feelings

No you don't. I've been on the Internet almost as long as you've been alive, and I've seen your type come and go. You want threads closed when you have nothing to say about the subject, or you've lost the intellectual high ground and have no rebuttal. Unlike you, I love real diversity of thought, even when it doesn't agree with me.

This is the last time I'm going to touch this. First, a majority of your posts are condescending (look it up), sort of like the one above me right now (see what I did there?). I go out of my way when posting on a controversial subject to ensure that what I say is never inflammatory, and the only time they turn aggressive is when someone like you tries to stir something up. I asked for one thread to be closed, and it wasn't because I didn't have anything left to add, but because something like this was starting to happen and we were going nowhere, so let's not exaggerate that issue. Next, I didn't know I had a "type," I was just writing what was on my mind a lot like you. Finally, when I said "this is getting over the top," I meant the malcontent felt between you and me. Again, I get the impression that won't be changing either. As always you're entitled to your opinion, which I assume will entitle segmenting this post as well and telling me what I said is misguided and why.

The ad works fine, is not an insult to the brand, and does not represent a sell out by Barbara Broccoli nor does it demonstrate that Craig is any less of man. It was made for a reason, I thought it worked nicely, and I think insulting anyone for trying is wrong. It does not reflect the character of the films at all. It's terrific he was referred to as 007, and that he is being belittle by his female (gasp!) boss in the form of Dench (like we've never seen that before...). This is how they wanted to handle the commercial. I doubt they were paid. It's a charitable organization after all, but then again I guess that makes them socıalısts or whatever. In any event, I'll have forgotten about it when I see the first teaser for Bond 23, as I'm sure most others on here will.

[Dustin]

then there's a good chance that he'll change and be more like, well, a woman and that changes the series. And trust me, that's EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET. This character will be Jane Bond 007 in a few more years. It'll be recast at some point with a female.

Seriously, Bond will never be cast as a woman. Remember this is a one off 2 minute ad, I don't think we will see Bond being more feminized in the actual films. While it is true that since 95, the Bond films have become more PC, the point is that Bond in those films really has not. You can see his initial displeasure having to work with a woman (Vesper), his disobeying of M's orders (he rarely disobeyed Lee's M as much), his sexist sense of humor (You are Stephanie Broadchest),etc. No, while the movies as a whole may become more PC, I don't think we will really see the feminization of Bond (not any more than we did with Brosnan in the role).

Jag, just out of interest, could you see Craig-Bond (or his successor, whoever that might be) actually dress up as a woman in a movie, to, say, go undercover, penetrate somewhere, etc?

Wonder what would be the general feeling about that?

Well, I'm not Jag, evidently. I'll give my thoughts just the same.

Bond in drag, for reasons of disguise, deception, demolition? I think it wouldn't work. Not because it would be beyond an agent to do so in order to get his mission completed. It wouldn't work because Bond basically is not shaped to fit the mould convincingly. The proportions would not fit, nor would the voice, gait, posture and so on. The thing is: Bond is not an actor.

[Jump James]

You make an interesting point Gravity. Would we have seen this add campaign if M was still portrayed by a male?

Edited by Jump James, 14 March 2011 - 07:53 PM.

[Germanlady]

A Bond that doesn't fight back is a Bond I don't recognize, and that is why I say this video has harmed the product.

Yeah - its very mature and manly to fight the truth. Cudos Gravity! You have outdone yourself with that one.

[Germanlady]

Keep 'em coming, sweetcheeks! I loves me some attention.

OH, I am sure, we ALL know that But if we compare our posts, its YOU, who does all the work. You must be out of work for all the time, you spend in answering to each single sentence written to you.

[Jackanaples]

What's really interesting is that GS thinks Bond is somehow being attacked in the PSA at all. And by the way, I think the ad works precisely because Bond currently has the most masculine image that he's had in decades. Maybe I'm wrong but I think only weak men are threatened by strong women. Men who are secure and confident in themselves love strong women and welcome the challenge and opportunity they present. I certainly always find women who I think are smarter than I am vastly sexier, for example.

I seriously doubt Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson are bored with Bond at the moment. In the past, when Pierce Brosnan was in the role yes. NOT, I hasten to add because of Brosnan, but because the creative direction at the time amounted to, "What can we have Bond do now?" As a question it's just too wide open to provoke anything really creative coming from it.

CASINO ROYALE was different. The kinds question they asked themselves was a good one: What if nobody had ever seen a James Bond movie before? What if Ian Fleming had created James Bond in the 21st century? What works about the series, and what doesn't? These are smart questions that led to very specific answers and a revitalization of the series.

Say what you like, GS. If I want to find people who hate James Bond, I pretty much have to come here to find them. I see an interest in the character and the movies (from the public and from people I know) that's far greater than at any time in my life previous.

[Loomis]

Within 10 years we'll see Daniel Craig (or the next James Bond) kissing a man in a PSA demanding equal rights for the GLBT community...

I doubt very much that that'll happen. But even if it did, so what?

Listen, I think this video is patronising and witless, and precisely the sort of smug drivel you'd expect whenever celebrities start grandstanding about "issues". At the same time, though, I can't see how it hurts James Bond, let alone that it's "perhaps the single biggest mistake EON has ever made". (Frankly, I think it's nice that the world is getting a reminder that Daniel Craig is still James Bond. Imagine how cool it would have been if Dalton had played 007 in a commercial in 1992.)

And I imagine that Fleming would have found the idea of 007 in drag to be amusingly bizarre.

I wonder whether Sam Taylor-Wood would be a realistic possibility for the director's chair on BOND 24. Not only has she done this video, but she and Craig are also reportedly very good friends, and her recent film NOWHERE BOY was, as I understand it, highly acclaimed.

[BJMDDS]

Matty_13 wrote:

Gravity...this is getting way over the top. I literally have nothing against you.

I have no idea what you are talking about. "Over the top?" I'm entitled to my opinion about why I don't like this video. What I don't undestand is why you take it so personally? You act as if my problem with Barbara is with you. If the criticism isn't directed at you, and it doesn't apply, then quit hollering about it.

Matty_13 continued:

the volatile rhetoric has to stop. So what if someone disagrees with you? Don't insult them for it, and don't insult other people for doing what they think is right. We're all fans of this character, but that doesn't mean we should feel possessive of him, especially not Craig. Ease up.

Find me an example where I insulted someone because of their views? Furthermore, who are you to cast stones? You're one of the worst offenders when it comes to impolite discourse, so before removing the splinter out of my eye, remove the rafter out of yours.

Matty_13 continued:

As such, I ask for threads to get closed when I feel things are going nowhere and the only ideas flying around are intended to hurt feelings

No you don't. I've been on the Internet almost as long as you've been alive, and I've seen your type come and go. You want threads closed when you have nothing to say about the subject, or you've lost the intellectual high ground and have no rebuttal. Unlike you, I love real diversity of thought, even when it doesn't agree with me.

This is the last time I'm going to touch this. First, a majority of your posts are condescending (look it up), sort of like the one above me right now (see what I did there?). I go out of my way when posting on a controversial subject to ensure that what I say is never inflammatory, and the only time they turn aggressive is when someone like you tries to stir something up. I asked for one thread to be closed, and it wasn't because I didn't have anything left to add, but because something like this was starting to happen and we were going nowhere, so let's not exaggerate that issue. Next, I didn't know I had a "type," I was just writing what was on my mind a lot like you. Finally, when I said "this is getting over the top," I meant the malcontent felt between you and me. Again, I get the impression that won't be changing either. As always you're entitled to your opinion, which I assume will entitle segmenting this post as well and telling me what I said is misguided and why.

The ad works fine, is not an insult to the brand, and does not represent a sell out by Barbara Broccoli nor does it demonstrate that Craig is any less of man. It was made for a reason, I thought it worked nicely, and I think insulting anyone for trying is wrong. It does not reflect the character of the films at all. It's terrific he was referred to as 007, and that he is being belittle by his female (gasp!) boss in the form of Dench (like we've never seen that before...). This is how they wanted to handle the commercial. I doubt they were paid. It's a charitable organization after all, but then again I guess that makes them socıalısts or whatever. In any event, I'll have forgotten about it when I see the first teaser for Bond 23, as I'm sure most others on here will.

Matt, the ad works fine? For who? Women? Bond? I doubt either. Gravity is quite correct and his overall tone might be a frustration from watching Eon dismantle and emasculate it's iconic hero. There were far better choices for Bond in 2002, yet Brocolli chose DC. She has gone into the political realm now by maligning the UK's and USA's governments in QOS. She has turned a suave spy into a Rambotic concoction. It has been 9 years now since DAD and only 2 films have been made. MGW is MIA. The final cherry on this spoiled cake of a franchise was a PSA having James Bond dressed silently in drag. You wonder where Mr. Gravity's tone comes from? If you work for or admire Barbara Brocolli you will say anything she does is brilliant;however, as a fan of this franchise for 40 years, I can tell you Barbara's INTENTIONAL degradation of the James Bond character has reached an all-time shocking low. NO, the PSA is NOT fine, it does NOTHING for women's rights, and it just illustrates a disturbing trend in the psyche of the producer.

[Garth007]

Matty_13 wrote:

Gravity...this is getting way over the top. I literally have nothing against you.

I have no idea what you are talking about. "Over the top?" I'm entitled to my opinion about why I don't like this video. What I don't undestand is why you take it so personally? You act as if my problem with Barbara is with you. If the criticism isn't directed at you, and it doesn't apply, then quit hollering about it.

Matty_13 continued:

the volatile rhetoric has to stop. So what if someone disagrees with you? Don't insult them for it, and don't insult other people for doing what they think is right. We're all fans of this character, but that doesn't mean we should feel possessive of him, especially not Craig. Ease up.

Find me an example where I insulted someone because of their views? Furthermore, who are you to cast stones? You're one of the worst offenders when it comes to impolite discourse, so before removing the splinter out of my eye, remove the rafter out of yours.

Matty_13 continued:

As such, I ask for threads to get closed when I feel things are going nowhere and the only ideas flying around are intended to hurt feelings

No you don't. I've been on the Internet almost as long as you've been alive, and I've seen your type come and go. You want threads closed when you have nothing to say about the subject, or you've lost the intellectual high ground and have no rebuttal. Unlike you, I love real diversity of thought, even when it doesn't agree with me.

This is the last time I'm going to touch this. First, a majority of your posts are condescending (look it up), sort of like the one above me right now (see what I did there?). I go out of my way when posting on a controversial subject to ensure that what I say is never inflammatory, and the only time they turn aggressive is when someone like you tries to stir something up. I asked for one thread to be closed, and it wasn't because I didn't have anything left to add, but because something like this was starting to happen and we were going nowhere, so let's not exaggerate that issue. Next, I didn't know I had a "type," I was just writing what was on my mind a lot like you. Finally, when I said "this is getting over the top," I meant the malcontent felt between you and me. Again, I get the impression that won't be changing either. As always you're entitled to your opinion, which I assume will entitle segmenting this post as well and telling me what I said is misguided and why.

The ad works fine, is not an insult to the brand, and does not represent a sell out by Barbara Broccoli nor does it demonstrate that Craig is any less of man. It was made for a reason, I thought it worked nicely, and I think insulting anyone for trying is wrong. It does not reflect the character of the films at all. It's terrific he was referred to as 007, and that he is being belittle by his female (gasp!) boss in the form of Dench (like we've never seen that before...). This is how they wanted to handle the commercial. I doubt they were paid. It's a charitable organization after all, but then again I guess that makes them socıalısts or whatever. In any event, I'll have forgotten about it when I see the first teaser for Bond 23, as I'm sure most others on here will.

Matt, the ad works fine? For who? Women? Bond? I doubt either. Gravity is quite correct and his overall tone might be a frustration from watching Eon dismantle and emasculate it's iconic hero. There were far better choices for Bond in 2002, yet Brocolli chose DC. She has gone into the political realm now by maligning the UK's and USA's governments in QOS. She has turned a suave spy into a Rambotic concoction. It has been 9 years now since DAD and only 2 films have been made. MGW is MIA. The final cherry on this spoiled cake of a franchise was a PSA having James Bond dressed silently in drag. You wonder where Mr. Gravity's tone comes from? If you work for or admire Barbara Brocolli you will say anything she does is brilliant;however, as a fan of this franchise for 40 years, I can tell you Barbara's INTENTIONAL degradation of the James Bond character has reached an all-time shocking low. NO, the PSA is NOT fine, it does NOTHING for women's rights, and it just illustrates a disturbing trend in the psyche of the producer.

To bad this is your opinion, not fact. You continually bash this PSA. Yeah we get it already get over it. It's a PSA and it wont hurt the franchise by far. You don't hear in the news that daniel craig was fired as bond because he dressed up as a woman. you don't hear that their isn't going to be a new bond film ever again. Hell sean connery dressed up in a wedding dress before. Pierce brosnan did a scetch on SNL as a gay guy selling cloths. Roger more played a gay guy on Boat trip. Don't say there is a difference because there isn't Daniel craig will still be bond and Barbra will still make movies. just because you don't like the psa dosen't mean they'll stop haveing daniel craig as bond just because you and your continued hatred for him. 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, 15 March 2011 - 12:23 AM.

[Matt_13]

I wish I worked for Barbara Broccoli. I bet she pays well. Not hard to look at either...oh no...I just objectified her. The ad didn't work! Nooo!!!

In all seriousness, though, I liked the ad because I was not offended by the ad. Simple as that. This defines beating a dead horse (or is it a mare in this case? Ah forget it.)

[jaguar007]

Jag, just out of interest, could you see Craig-Bond (or his successor, whoever that might be) actually dress up as a woman in a movie, to, say, go undercover, penetrate somewhere, etc?

Wonder what would be the general feeling about that?

Well, honestly I doubt the screenwriters would ever come up with a situation like that for Bond, but then again, back in the 60s I doubt anyone would have ever thought Bond would have dressed up as a clown to go undercover.

Dressing up as a woman undercover, while doubtful it is not totally impossible, after all The Saint did it as well.

[Garth007]

Pierce brosnan did a scetch on SNL as a gay guy selling cloths.

Was he on SNL and in their sketches in order to promote the latest Bond movie? Which film was he plugging for that appearance?

Roger more played a gay guy on Boat trip.

Like, 15, or 16 years after he retired from Bond.


Irrelevant material snipped. If this had been Daniel Craig or Judi Dench making a personal appearance to support these causes it would an entirely different matter. But to willingly allow Bond to be co-opted by a radical group of extreme-left-wing feminist activists is absurd.

Here is link to video of Pierce Brosnan SNL. he appeared in 2001 so it wasn't for james bond film premoteing.
http://www.vidstogo....fname=jeffreys3

As for both of actors i meant as both doing extreme like stuff as like daniel craig not meaning while or after tenure.

Edited by Garth007, 15 March 2011 - 03:02 AM.

[BJMDDS]

Matty_13 wrote:

Gravity...this is getting way over the top. I literally have nothing against you.

I have no idea what you are talking about. "Over the top?" I'm entitled to my opinion about why I don't like this video. What I don't undestand is why you take it so personally? You act as if my problem with Barbara is with you. If the criticism isn't directed at you, and it doesn't apply, then quit hollering about it.

Matty_13 continued:

the volatile rhetoric has to stop. So what if someone disagrees with you? Don't insult them for it, and don't insult other people for doing what they think is right. We're all fans of this character, but that doesn't mean we should feel possessive of him, especially not Craig. Ease up.

Find me an example where I insulted someone because of their views? Furthermore, who are you to cast stones? You're one of the worst offenders when it comes to impolite discourse, so before removing the splinter out of my eye, remove the rafter out of yours.

Matty_13 continued:

As such, I ask for threads to get closed when I feel things are going nowhere and the only ideas flying around are intended to hurt feelings

No you don't. I've been on the Internet almost as long as you've been alive, and I've seen your type come and go. You want threads closed when you have nothing to say about the subject, or you've lost the intellectual high ground and have no rebuttal. Unlike you, I love real diversity of thought, even when it doesn't agree with me.

This is the last time I'm going to touch this. First, a majority of your posts are condescending (look it up), sort of like the one above me right now (see what I did there?). I go out of my way when posting on a controversial subject to ensure that what I say is never inflammatory, and the only time they turn aggressive is when someone like you tries to stir something up. I asked for one thread to be closed, and it wasn't because I didn't have anything left to add, but because something like this was starting to happen and we were going nowhere, so let's not exaggerate that issue. Next, I didn't know I had a "type," I was just writing what was on my mind a lot like you. Finally, when I said "this is getting over the top," I meant the malcontent felt between you and me. Again, I get the impression that won't be changing either. As always you're entitled to your opinion, which I assume will entitle segmenting this post as well and telling me what I said is misguided and why.

The ad works fine, is not an insult to the brand, and does not represent a sell out by Barbara Broccoli nor does it demonstrate that Craig is any less of man. It was made for a reason, I thought it worked nicely, and I think insulting anyone for trying is wrong. It does not reflect the character of the films at all. It's terrific he was referred to as 007, and that he is being belittle by his female (gasp!) boss in the form of Dench (like we've never seen that before...). This is how they wanted to handle the commercial. I doubt they were paid. It's a charitable organization after all, but then again I guess that makes them socıalısts or whatever. In any event, I'll have forgotten about it when I see the first teaser for Bond 23, as I'm sure most others on here will.

Matt, the ad works fine? For who? Women? Bond? I doubt either. Gravity is quite correct and his overall tone might be a frustration from watching Eon dismantle and emasculate it's iconic hero. There were far better choices for Bond in 2002, yet Brocolli chose DC. She has gone into the political realm now by maligning the UK's and USA's governments in QOS. She has turned a suave spy into a Rambotic concoction. It has been 9 years now since DAD and only 2 films have been made. MGW is MIA. The final cherry on this spoiled cake of a franchise was a PSA having James Bond dressed silently in drag. You wonder where Mr. Gravity's tone comes from? If you work for or admire Barbara Brocolli you will say anything she does is brilliant;however, as a fan of this franchise for 40 years, I can tell you Barbara's INTENTIONAL degradation of the James Bond character has reached an all-time shocking low. NO, the PSA is NOT fine, it does NOTHING for women's rights, and it just illustrates a disturbing trend in the psyche of the producer.

To bad this is your opinion, not fact. You continually bash this PSA. Yeah we get it already get over it. It's a PSA and it wont hurt the franchise by far. You don't hear in the news that daniel craig was fired as bond because he dressed up as a woman. you don't hear that their isn't going to be a new bond film ever again. Hell sean connery dressed up in a wedding dress before. Pierce brosnan did a scetch on SNL as a gay guy selling cloths. Roger more played a gay guy on Boat trip. Don't say there is a difference because there isn't Daniel craig will still be bond and Barbra will still make movies. just because you don't like the psa dosen't mean they'll stop haveing daniel craig as bond just because you and your continued hatred for him. 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.

Garth: this is a copied reply by you. You already used this paragraph already once before.

[elizabeth]

Just watched the ad.

Disclaimer: Hey, guess what? I'm a woman, a teenage girl (gasp!) no less, so I'm GOING to be biased. Dear Gravity and everyone else who hates the ad: negate me. I really don't ing care.

I thought the beginning of the ad was extremely powerful, with Craig as 007. The end of that section really calls attention to Bond's promiscuity. You can see that almost pensive look on his face when M says those final words.

I also thought that Craig's taking off of the wig was extremely powerful. It shows that he really wants to change his ways as Bond and really feels for the female sex.

[Jim]

If I want to find people who hate James Bond, I pretty much have to come here to find them.

Agreed. Depressing, really.

The event this advertisement supported was over a week ago now and this horse is not only flogged beyond death but safely tucked up in a tin of dog food.

Bit embarassing - bit tragic - that people think that the "James Bond" angle on this is of any importance whatsoever.

[elizabeth]

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?

For crying out loud, SHUT THE UP ABOUT HUGH JACKMAN. HE'S NOT EVEN HOT.

My God, you're worse than me. I'm a 19 YEAR OLD GIRL, and the good folks here at CBn don't see me jumping on the bandwagon for you-know-who (sorry guys, can't say the name, gave him up for Lent. Hints: dead. Initials SL) as the next Bond (as much as I would like him to be). This ad is perfect for Dan and Judi, and it shows that they are among the few celebrities that actually care about the issues surrounding them, rather than drowning themselves in money.

[Iroquois]

If I want to find people who hate James Bond, I pretty much have to come here to find them.

Agreed. Depressing, really.

The event this advertisement supported was over a week ago now and this horse is not only flogged beyond death but safely tucked up in a tin of dog food.

Bit embarassing - bit tragic - that people think that the "James Bond" angle on this is of any importance whatsoever.

I agree 100%.

Edited by Iroquois, 15 March 2011 - 01:32 PM.

[David Schofield]

Bit embarassing - bit tragic - that people think that the "James Bond" angle on this is of any importance whatsoever.

Now if you mean this ad is of no importance whatsoever, impact wise, on the James Bond character and film series, I'd agree 100%.

However, if you're saying that the "James Bond" angle is unimportant to the impact of the ad - that had any old Joe Blow dressed up as a woman the ad would have worked as well as having James Bond, historically reknown misoginist, dressed as a woman - then I disagree most vehemently.

Surely, you jest, Jim. Or am I missing something?

[Germanlady]

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?

For crying out loud, SHUT THE UP ABOUT HUGH JACKMAN. HE'S NOT EVEN HOT.

My God, you're worse than me. I'm a 19 YEAR OLD GIRL, and the good folks here at CBn don't see me jumping on the bandwagon for you-know-who (sorry guys, can't say the name, gave him up for Lent. Hints: dead. Initials SL) as the next Bond (as much as I would like him to be). This ad is perfect for Dan and Judi, and it shows that they are among the few celebrities that actually care about the issues surrounding them, rather than drowning themselves in money.

Perfectly put