Bond 24 Press Conference Discussion Thread

And the faux feminists are at it again: https://games.yahoo.com/news/bond-movie-fix-one-biggest-183002402.html

Makeshift Python wrote:

And the faux feminists are at it again: https://games.yahoo.com/news/bond-movie-fix-one-biggest-183002402.html

They need to get laid.

Moore wrote:

According to a source, an old friend of ours CASINOROYALE will be starring in a guest role in SPECTRE. It will be a hair raising appearance full of close shaves.

Why? Because I'm an asshole and I haven't posted on here in ages.

I'm sure he's been polishing his acting skills over the last few years. He'll be a shining new star.

Makeshift Python wrote:

And the faux feminists are at it again: https://games.yahoo.com/news/bond-movie-fix-one-biggest-183002402.html

Here's hoping SPECTRE really gives these whiners the shits.

Maybe Bond should cum on a girl's tits and then turn to the camera and cum again through the trademark gunbarrel.

bitchcraft wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

And the faux feminists are at it again: https://games.yahoo.com/news/bond-movie-fix-one-biggest-183002402.html

They need to get laid.

Just another "feminist writer" who's really just angry about the fact that they haven't been featured in a real publication yet.

Δ

Quote :

It's rare for a Bond film to allow a woman to be strong in the same ways Bond is

That's because it is a JAMES BOND film. Nobody really gives too much of a damn about the girls storyline. Because the film is about Bond. And they want to see Bond save the day. It's not a Bond/Camille film.

It's the same reason why Felix Leiter is an incompetent, buffoonish, impotent cockbag in 98% of his appearances. Because it's a James Bond film, not a Felix Leiter movie.

Everybody wants to see Bond save the day and pound the girl.

Nobody wants to see John Terry save the world and pound a girl to a body devouring orgasm.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

And the faux feminists are at it again: https://games.yahoo.com/news/bond-movie-fix-one-biggest-183002402.html

Quote :

Quantum of Solace, which was met with far less enthusiasm upon its release in 2008, was even more progressive where women are concerned. The key woman in Solace is Camille Montes (Olga Kurylenko), a trained fighter and secret service agent seeking revenge on the villainous General Medrano (Joaquín Cosio). Bond treats her as a protege, not as a booty call. Together, as agents and equals, they bring down the bad guys.

In one of their first encounters, Bond, thinking he's being heroic, "saves" Camille from Medrano, only to find out she'd worked years to get close enough to the general to assassinate him. He thinks he's doing her a favor, but she's understandably angry with him for blowing her big chance. Later in the film, Camille saves another woman from being raped by Medrano, and faces off against him in combat, eventually killing him and bringing her own journey for justice to an end.

It's rare for a Bond film to allow a woman to be strong in the same ways Bond is — and Quantum of Solace deserves praise for treating its woman agent with this respect.

They conventionally forget to mention that Camille is the most boring girl in the series's 52 year run. If Helga is feminism's triumph, then we're all fucked.

Quote :

It doesn't neuter Bond to have strong women in his life, and, as we saw with Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, it makes for a much more interesting film.

You couldn't make it up.

The writer's looking past M in SKYFALL, who was the leading woman in that film. She was also more developed than Camille and Vesper. A lot stronger, too. We didn't see M curl up in the fetal position once Skyfall caught on fire, or kill herself because she totally fucked up the job.

This article is a nice example of modern feminism totally backfiring.

The problem is that they don't recognise that individuals are individual. Starwberry Fields, for instance, was fairly naive. Camille was extremely driven. Two different women, two different personalities - just like in the real world. If they have flaws, then that just makes them human - again, just like in the real world. But if modern feminism had its way, both characters would be identical. Who cares about entertainment being created for the sake of entertainment when you can force it to be socially progressive?

And you can tell they are cherry-picking their arguments. Yes, Bond stops Camille from killing Medrano, but success was never guaranteed, and she would have been killed. It is only with Bond's aid that she can even the odds and survive. You could just as easily argue that she's a sexist character.

And to my mind, that's the problem with modern feminism - it's neither modern nor feminist. It still relies on the militant tactics used by Mary Shelley in her original treatsie on the role of women in society, and it demands absolute and unconditional representation of women as a collective body with no recognition of the individual's values, beliefs or attitudes.

The writer obviously doesn't know anything about Bond, both in literature or cinema. She can't even offer a decent analysis of the recent films and, as well all know, it doesn't take a fucking rocket scientist to do that. She isn't looking at the context of the series or the source material. She's done no research, unless you count popping the discs into the DVD player and tuning out for a few hours.

Obviously, she has no interest in this genre or franchise. So, why publish the article? Just to make noise and attempt to get a response?

And, on top of all that, she's writing for Polygon.

Moore wrote:

Quote :

It's rare for a Bond film to allow a woman to be strong in the same ways Bond is

That's because it is a JAMES BOND film. Nobody really gives too much of a damn about the girls storyline. Because the film is about Bond. And they want to see Bond save the day. It's not a Bond/Camille film.

It's the same reason why Felix Leiter is an incompetent, buffoonish, impotent cockbag in 98% of his appearances. Because it's a James Bond film, not a Felix Leiter movie.

Everybody wants to see Bond save the day and pound the girl.

Nobody wants to see John Terry save the world and pound a girl to a body devouring orgasm.

BTW...I think my favorite part of those cast interviews is when the reporter asks Waltz about how they can live up to Skyfall's success. Not sure if it was the language barrier or not, but Waltz just looked at the guy and basically said "Hey man, I just work here".

Well, on the plus side, we won't have a film with Rhianna in it....or Penelope Cruz. And thankfully no Chiwetel Eljifor.

But, you know, the movie has been filming for a day now. How much longer do we have to wait until the teaser trailer is released? Why haven't they released it already?

I can't wait six more months for the teaser trailer, so I'm going to go freeze myself to death in a blanket of snow and i've instructed a friend to resuscitate me when the teaser trailer is released. What could possibly go wrong?

Would love Penelope Cruz to pop up in a Bond film. With Monica's casting, there's a decade left to get Cruz cast!

But I agree, on the plus side, no Rhianna! Didn't really take that seriously anyway.

How much you want to bet Barbara had a huge hand in bringing in Bellucci? This is Barbara's way of pushing her feminist agenda on the series by now having a Bond Girl who is about twice the age of the average actress in these things. Is Babs point that women can grow more beautiful and sexy with age? Is she trying to counter stereotypes that your sex life ends at 40 and that you should no longer be considered desirable?

I can just imagine all the homework Babs gave Michael to do: go watch all sex scenes involving Monica or Lea and then report back to me. What London dungeon did Babs have Michael tied down in while she was doing the press conference?

Control wrote:

The writer obviously doesn't know anything about Bond, both in literature or cinema. She can't even offer a decent analysis of the recent films and, as well all know, it doesn't take a fucking rocket scientist to do that. She isn't looking at the context of the series or the source material. She's done no research, unless you count popping the discs into the DVD player and tuning out for a few hours.

Obviously, she has no interest in this genre or franchise. So, why publish the article? Just to make noise and attempt to get a response?

And, on top of all that, she's writing for Polygon.

I think I have read enough after her appraisal of the Connery features.

I expect the usual feminist bullshit whenever a Bond film start rolling so this is no surprise.  I found this bit more disturbing:

Quote :

In Skyfall, the most progressive Bond era (at least, where women are concerned) was turned way back. It crossed the line where I, as a feminist, felt comfortable enjoying something despite its problems (which is where I typically land on Brosnan- and Craig-era Bond films), and just made me uncomfortable.

Today's children requires life to make them feel comfortable whether its films, politics or conversation. Used to be a writer's badge of honour that his material challenged audience expectations. Brave New Fucking World.

The fact that she object to the idea that a woman might step down from a job she feels she's not suited for, really goes against what feminism is supposed to be. When Bond suggested that the field work wasn't for her, he wasn't saying "it's a man's world, leave it to the professionals", he said "it's not for everyone". It clearly didn't register in that writer's head.

The thing about all that shit is that feminists demand that women step up and become physicists and mathematicians yet rarely enter the serious disciplines themselves. Anyone who's taught knows that you lead by example, but then modern feminism is all about emotion rather than logical thought.

Today's feminism preaches strength, but then infantilises women and make victims of them all. It's a con intended to perpetuate a well-funded industry and public sector. The opportunities are there for women, but they need to overcome their fears and take them. The world needs engineers so no one in their right mind would object to feminism campaigning for that, but instead the taxpayer bankrolls millions of female non-jobs whose only intention is to make women feel bad about themselves. The people who have the dimmest view of this are successful businesswomen. Men are always willing to make excuses for womens' failures and behaviour, but female managers in the private sector are not.

To me her objection falls into the same category as the hand-wringing about Lovecrafts racism or the insistence that "Tintin in Africa" is no longer sold in bookstores. Beyond the fact that most of the Connery Bonds are very entertaining features, they are products of their own time and it is foolish to try and judge them entirely through 2014 eyes.

I once read an article about Darwin that rubbished his accomplishments because of his gender theories in terms of the human brain. Applying 21st century sensibilities to the work of a 19th century man is daft.

I knew a self-proclaimed feminist. She was supported by her parents through out college and I'm pretty sure she hadn't learned a damn thing by year four.

She slept with a big-wig at Tumblr, got a nice job and now probably makes $75,000 a year.


Truly inspiring.

The interesting thing about feminism is how it takes women's sexual power over men out of the equation when it's the greatest and most unique weapon they have. I mean, the things I've done to get my end away...  

Control wrote:

I knew a self-proclaimed feminist. She was supported by her parents through out college and I'm pretty sure she hadn't learned a damn thing by year four.

She slept with a big-wig at Tumblr, got a nice job and now probably makes $75,000 a year.


Truly inspiring.

Indeed, I want to turn this into a film.