Jump to content

Heartofice

Members
  • Content count

    2,328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Heartofice

  • Rank
    Council Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2,182 profile views
  1. Heartofice

    R,I.P. Thread

    Very sad. Easily my favourite Python. Even outside of his absurd ability to make me laugh, he seemed like a great guy and his books and tv shows outside of Python were great too. Nobody could dress up as a woman and scream like he did.
  2. Heartofice

    UK Politics: And Brexit came swirling down

    Haven't read too much into it but isn't all about encampments and spending specific periods of time on other people's land?
  3. Heartofice

    1917 film (spoilers)

    I just assumed when watching it that those rifles accuracy wasn’t great. Add in a bunch of panic shots , in the dark, whilst moving and it didn’t bother me they didn’t hit their target. I don’t know enough about WW1 rifles to guess at how accurate they tended to be
  4. Heartofice

    Bond 25: No Time To Die

    I haven't said it's unworkable. The premise is that its a major change. I've laid out all the reasons I believe it a far greater change to the Bond movies and character than simply changing the race of Bond. You could probably make anything work if you wanted to. What I've always maintained is that there is a limit to how much you can change before it stops being recognisably James Bond. From that point I'd ask, what is the point of making such a fundamental change? There doesn't appear to be any real advantage over simply creating a new character and the potential risks and damage to the franchise (and possibly to female led action movies) means that it makes little sense to push for it.
  5. Heartofice

    Bond 25: No Time To Die

    I can buy the argument for making Bond female, for representation reasons. I happen to think that it's a deeply flawed one, but I get why people would want to argue for such a thing. Where I have to get off the bus is when someone tries to argue that changing James Bond's sex or gender is just a minor flip. That for me is a real sticking point. Just looking at some of the other variables that have been proposed to change: Race On the surface changing Bond's race could be seen as a big change, but in actuality it would probably be entirely cosmetic and make zero difference to any other element of the movie. We already have examples of this. Both Felix and Moneypenny have changed race seamlessly and it has had zero effect on the story or their character. Since racial dynamics are rarely brought up in Bond movies and also that race is far less politicised in the UK anyway than the US, you could bring in your Idris Elba without any real dynamic change. Viewers are seemingly able to handle the suspension of disbelief of changing actor for James Bond, and I'm sure they would be able to handle this change too. Background / Nationality Changing Bonds nationality would constitute a bigger change. Supposing he was an American in the British Secret Service (if that is even possible) then there might be the odd jab at his nationality and it might potentially change some aspect of his nature, but not necessarily so. Change it so that he's spying for some other nation and that changes most elements of the movies, they will lose their quintessential Britishness which is part of their charm and reason for existing. Much of the dynamics and recognisable elements of the movies would notably shift. However Bond's character could probably remain very similar, the things he does, the way he treats people, the way people treat him. You could imagine back in the day Hollywood insisting on a US version of Bond, they'd still call him James Bond and maybe people wouldn't even notice the difference. But it would be a big loss to the franchise. Gender / Sex Ok so you change James Bond into a woman. Well the first thing you need to do is change the name, so it probably wouldn't be 'James' Bond, let's go with the obvious 'Jane' Bond. So from the very start it's not the same character because there is a different name. Secondly, suspension of disbelief. Would audiences be able to switch over in their heads and say 'yep, this is the same character as the James Bond in all those other movies'. I really don't think they could. There is a clear delineation between men and women and audiences would struggle to see how this is supposed to be the same character. From the start then nobody is able to assume that this is the same Bond as other movies, it's a clean slate. Might be a positive, might be a negative. But it IS a big change. Ok then, what about Bond's relationships with other people. That would clearly be a big change, especially romantically. We all recognise Bond as this suave sophisticated womaniser, able to seduce the most fascinating and beautiful women in the world, and that is one of the elements of Bond's character that people enjoy the most. How does it work with a woman in the role? Is she seducing men? Would that work in the same way? Almost certainly not. Like it or not male / female dynamics are not symmetrical. Do men need the same level of seducing by a beautiful woman as the reverse? Do we believe that is the same thing or will seduction scenes consist of some bloke not believing his luck and hurrying to find a bathroom to make out with Jane. How will audiences react to a promiscuous woman? Will it be the same reaction as to James Bond. While it might be interesting to see that reaction, it doesn't mean audience reactions will be the same. You can at this point compare Bond to Killing Eve, where the main character is promiscuous, but she is a character with massive personality flaws who barely feels any humanity at all, and her promiscuity leads out of that. Who is she seducing then? Men? Who are these men? Are they dressed sexily? Are the opening credits filled with the dancers from Magic Mike waving their thongs in silhouette? Are these men a bunch of himbos? Badly drawn male models walking out of the sea? Or is it women? is Jane Bond a lesbian? Well that's a change. How would that work? Will we get a bunch of scenes of women turning her down because they aren't gay. How does her sexuality change the dynamics of her character. Then there is the misogyny. How does this work with a female? Does she become a misandrist? Is she dismissive of men, does she treat them as set dressing? Does she use her physicality to over power men in the bedroom? Or is she dismissive of women? That would be an odd change. Plus if you want to add in some more feminist points to the movies you might want to start bringing up how women are treated differently, how does she deal with authority, how does authority deal with her. Some people might be nicer to her, some might dismiss her. Every single interaction she has with people might have to reflect that she is a woman. But then would the nature of the movies change dramatically to become some political think piece instead of mindless fluff. Then there is the physical element of it. Most Bond's are played by tall, physically imposing actors, people you could imagine could go toe to toe with the Henchmen of the world. Craig is shorter but really bulked up for the role. A woman would be much smaller than most of the people she fights, she would have to find other ways to take people down. Would audiences be ok with the amount of violence inflicted on James Bond if it's a woman. What about the notorious torture scenes,especially to genitals, are we ok with those? Then what does Jane Bond look like. The iconic shot of Bond wearing a tux and holding a Walther PPK.. well that has to change. Will she wearing a tux? If so, why? Is a woman wearing a tux and a man wearing a tux sending the same message? Does the iconic shot even exist any more? Is she walking around in fantastic dresses all day by top designers? Does that mean the same thing. Is she allowed to wear skirts? Is she rough and ready looking like a Daniel Craig... if so how does that still stay glamourous and attractive if it's a woman. Like it or not men and women are judged differently when it comes to physical attractiveness. Then there's the problem of Bond being a male fantasy figure. He is notoriously 'the man that men would to be and women want to be with'. Cast a female and suddenly that is flipped. Actually it's not flipped, because it's unlikely to work the other way around. So who is the movie now for? ---- So it seems to me that whatever the rights or wrongs of gender bending James Bond, it would always be a massive change, and I can't imagine anyone being able to accept that it is the same character as the James Bond they already recognise. It would always be seen as a different character. So while you might be able to keep a number of traits of the character and tropes of the story, there would be so much that would have to change that nobody would be able to accept it. Also it would just be a deeply unpopular move. Nobody really wants to see a female Bond, except for Pierce Brosnan, and if we got one and then the movie dies on his ass and is an enormous bomb, what does that do for 'representation'. It would set back the cause by decades. So it's a movie that absolutely HAS to succeed. That's why it would never happen.
  6. Heartofice

    The Outsider HBO

    Very engrossing, I'm really enjoying it so far. One thought:
  7. Heartofice

    UK Politics: And Brexit came swirling down

    All the Labour candidates are doing a brilliant job of ensuring a Tory government for the next decade. In Megxit news, it appears that Harry and Meghan didn't get the withdrawal agreement they wished for, hoping for a soft Megxit, instead will be cast adrift in a hard Megxit hoping to make their own trade deals around the world... but probably without being able to use 'Royal' in their brand.
  8. Heartofice

    Bond 25: No Time To Die

    Pffft..I doubt anyone ever complained about Terminator 2 or Buffy or Aliens or Xena.. and maybe there is a good reason for that.
  9. Heartofice

    Watch, Watched, Watching: Those aren't pillows!

    It seems to have mixed opinions and some didn’t like it, but I kinda loved it. I guess if you are 4 eps in and can’t be bothered you’ll be in the first category
  10. Heartofice

    Watchmen: Nostalgia is a helluva drug. (spoilers)

    Nostalgia was the highlight of the series no doubt, maybe because it felt a bit more coherent and self contained. Also the subject matter was more compelling. I think I would have much preferred a Watchmen prequel to this sort-of sequel as that could have been much more interesting. Too often my mind kept wandering during the show, and only when it landed on elements I recognised from the comics did I feel any great interest. I just felt like the show expected a lot of investment from the viewer before giving them anything juicy. As usual from the writers, giving us lots of questions , but mostly frustrating answers.
  11. Heartofice

    Bond 25: No Time To Die

    What will it achieve though? What would be the goal? What is the problem that gender bending Bond would address? I keep having to ask this question and I’m not getting a good answer here. In 2020 some of his behaviour would be deemed inappropriate. No I’m not a fan of the term , though I would concede some of the things Bond did in the past would make me cringe these days. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for a strong masculine bond who is desired by and sleeps with numerous attractive women. As mentioned he’s a Male fantasy figure. Doesn’t mean I’m ok with him beating women up or treating them like set dressing. Bond has also been closer to a superhero at times and there isn’t really all that much distinction these days. Plus James Bond does the least spying of any Spy going. He doesn’t fit his own job description. Either way I’m not sure it matters.
  12. Heartofice

    UK Politics: And Brexit came swirling down

    Which facts? Yes, that was what I was referring to. Immigration is much less of a concern for people now that Brexit has happened and they appear to have been listened to.
  13. Heartofice

    Bond 25: No Time To Die

    Soooo.. you are asking for more representation in 'James Bond' movies... because? Because women have historically been prevented from getting jobs as James Bond in the past? Because the field of James Bonds has a sexist recruitment policy? You've given a really weak reason which seemingly defies all known logic. This is where reality seems to be something you struggle to get to grips with. You might not have noticed butJames Bond was written as a male character, it's right there on the page. It's right there on the screen. He is a male in the same way that Harry Potter is clearly male. So lets just agree that making James Bond a woman is changing James Bond... because James Bond isn't a woman. If you want to do an alternative version where there is a character 'like' James Bond that is a woman then sure... ...oh do you know what.. this is just..
  14. Heartofice

    UK Politics: And Brexit came swirling down

    Not sure if you purposely wrote the most 'London Liberal' type of post there as some sort of parody, but it was hauntingly accurate. https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-of-concern/#kp2 When I say anti immigration sentiment, what I was actually referring to was that concern about immigration has dropped, although like most places Brits would prefer less immigration.
  15. Heartofice

    UK Politics: And Brexit came swirling down

    I'm not really seeing a lurch to the right or one happening in the future. The dividing lines between left and right don't mean very much any more. I think that once Brexit has happened those areas will at least feel like they have been listened to, it isn't a bunch of London liberals telling them they are all racists and 'deplorables'. I can't see any reason for them to lurch to the right. Anti immigration sentiment has fallen massively once it became clear Brexit was going to happen and control of border would be brought back to the UK. With Corbyn gone and a strong leader they would have a much better chance. They have been a terrible party of opposition for a very long time, before Corbyn. Unfortunately none of their candidates look like that strong leader, all have massive failings one way or another.
×