OT: 74th Obsequious Banter Thread: Remember That Mike Vecchione Guy?

[Lord Defect]

Idris Elba as 006 or 008. MI5 or whatever it’s called is an organization that has more than one agent. Don’t replace a character, even though that’s kind of the gimmick, make a new one. Oh just make sure you don’t take Sean beans number, he was a bad double oh.

 

[Lord Defect]

Scraping wallpaper off the ceiling and watching the dem debate. Pound sign being the best me

 

[Starat327]

Yeah, I heard something like that too. I love girl power and girls kicking ass, but I'm not sure "James Bond" is the character for that. They should make her like 008.

Jamie bond? James bond has an illegitimate daughter?

 

[CanadianFlyer88]

Idris Elba as 006 or 008. MI5 or whatever it’s called is an organization that has more than one agent. Don’t replace a character, even though that’s kind of the gimmick, make a new one. Oh just make sure you don’t take Sean beans number, he was a bad double oh.

Bean was 006.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Idris Elba as 006 or 008. MI5 or whatever it’s called is an organization that has more than one agent. Don’t replace a character, even though that’s kind of the gimmick, make a new one. Oh just make sure you don’t take Sean beans number, he was a bad double oh.

Eww, **** that. I can't stand Charles Minor. I agree with the rest of your post though - plenty of meat on that bone.

EDIT: I forgot the Sean Bean part. Don't badmouth Beaner, he's fine.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Aren’t they setting up the next installment to be like a girl? Or like a spin off?

So... from what I understand that entire thing was blown out of proportion.

Essentially James Bond is “retired” in the universe so they gave his callsign 007 to a woman. She’s not being the new James Bond but it was put out there to make people think that was the case. James Bond returns to MI6 and there’s a new 007. Simple as that.

To my knowledge it doesn’t go any deeper than that. There is no spin off.

Unless I missed something completely.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

A black woman, at that. If you thought people were complaining about Bond actors before....

It’s like a spin off essentially though? It kind of has to be by making that drastic of change to the character‘s appearance.

I don’t necessarily mind it. I admittedly wouldn’t really have much interest in it to be honest. But it is kind of lazy that they basically want to mooch of the Bond franchise name/brand instead of just creating some entire brand new entity.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

It’s like a spin off essentially though? It kind of has to be by making that drastic of change to the character‘s appearance.

I don’t necessarily mind it. I admittedly wouldn’t really have much interest in it to be honest. But it is kind of lazy that they basically want to mooch of the Bond franchise name/brand instead of just creating some entire brand new entity.

I would have huge interest in that if they cast it well. What I mean is, if she made me horny, I would watch it.

 

[BigToe]

Eww, **** that. I can't stand Charles Minor. I agree with the rest of your post though - plenty of meat on that bone.

EDIT: I forgot the Sean Bean part. Don't badmouth Beaner, he's fine.

Fight me

 

[CanadianFlyer88]

It’s like a spin off essentially though? It kind of has to be by making that drastic of change to the character‘s appearance.

I don’t necessarily mind it. I admittedly wouldn’t really have much interest in it to be honest. But it is kind of lazy that they basically want to mooch of the Bond franchise name/brand instead of just creating some entire brand new entity.

It's all speculation at this point, but the rumour is that 007 will be summoned only to reveal that 007 is no longer a white man because Bond is presumably retired (or dead).

It's probably all bollocks anyway... aside from the actor being a woman, that is.

 

[Hurricane28]

Brad was my pick to win, and wow he was slow on the buzzer. I couldn’t pick against a guy whose only loss is to a computer, but I guess the signs were there because his teammates mainly did the work in the All Star games. I thought Ken was the least likely of the three to win but he’s now the undisputed GOAT

 

[Striiker]

Taking an established franchise and suddenly changing the main character(s) race/gender to be progressive and get attention is unbelievably stupid.

 

[Lord Defect]

Eww, **** that. I can't stand Charles Minor. I agree with the rest of your post though - plenty of meat on that bone.

EDIT: I forgot the Sean Bean part. Don't badmouth Beaner, he's fine.

I wasn’t bad mouthing, I was worried about continuity. 006 should stay bean and stay dead.

 

[Cody Webster]

@Tripod @bennysflyers16 @Cody Webster

The champagne (I'm not finished yet, no spoilers for one hour)

Saw that gif online. Haven't been able to watch the episode yet. Maybe tomorrow night after the Flyers are getting smoked

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Taking an established franchise and suddenly changing the main character(s) race/gender to be progressive and get attention is unbelievably stupid.

That isn’t happening here though. They did put it out there to mislead people into thinking they were doing it but they’re not.

So that might actually be worse now that I think about it.

James Bond is going to be “retired” to start the next movie and a African-American woman has taken the call sign of 007 when he comes back. They’re going for the shock factor but there’s no actual substance to it.

Similar to the news stories that came out saying Lando was Pansexual or whatever before Solo came out.

 

[Striiker]

That isn’t happening here though. They did put it out there to mislead people into thinking they were doing it but they’re not.

So that might actually be worse now that I think about it.

James Bond is going to be “retired” to start the next movie and a African-American woman has taken the call sign of 007 when he comes back. They’re going for the shock factor but there’s no actual substance to it.

Similar to the news stories that came out saying Lando was Pansexual or whatever before Solo came out.

EDIT: Oh wait, I see what you mean now. So he's still the main character of the movie but just the title of "007" changed to someone else. I though you meant that at the end of this movie he retires and she takes over the future movies. Still a dumb gimmick for attention, but doesn’t really impact the series I guess.

 

[Magua]

I don't care if they change a character's race, gender, you name it. Honestly, I can't begin to understand people who get upset about this in the 21st century. Just make it good -- that's all that is ever important. These properties get old and boring. I'm speaking in general, but most certainly when it comes to characters that get rebooted every few years and by definition are "replaced." These are fictional characters. James Bond is not a person. He's an ever evolving IP.

I watch Doctor Who. They made the Doctor female for the first time last season. The show has been pretty mediocre. But Jodie Whittaker, the actress, is excellent and they've squandered her if anything. Speaking of Bond, Judy Dench is the best M, a role not originally female. Nick Fury in the comics isn't black like Samuel L. Jackson. They made Hermione black in the Harry Potter play. Many examples. Big whoop. Now and again it's lazy, but a lot of the time it's innovative and opens the role to interpretation and fit.

 

[Lotusflower]

These are fictional characters. James Bond is not a person. He's an ever evolving IP.

Batman, Superman etc. These are just modern mythologies people hijack to live vicarious fantasies anyway.

It not like we dont have several centuries of non-white stage play/movie characters white-washed to make the performance more palatable to desired demographics.
Many of these characters were actual historical figures as well,not fictional characters like Bond.

Alec Guinness played Prince Faisal of Iraq in 'Lawrence of Arabia' . And was great in his role.
Demographics shift and these movie companies will always play where the $ goes.

 

[Lord Defect]

I don't care if they change a character's race, gender, you name it. Honestly, I can't begin to understand people who get upset about this in the 21st century. Just make it good -- that's all that is ever important. These properties get old and boring. I'm speaking in general, but most certainly when it comes to characters that get rebooted every few years and by definition are "replaced." These are fictional characters. James Bond is not a person. He's an ever evolving IP.

I watch Doctor Who. They made the Doctor female for the first time last season. The show has been pretty mediocre. But Jodie Whittaker, the actress, is excellent and they've squandered her if anything. Speaking of Bond, Judy Dench is the best M, a role not originally female. Nick Fury in the comics isn't black like Samuel L. Jackson. They made Hermione black in the Harry Potter play. Many examples. Big whoop. Now and again it's lazy, but a lot of the time it's innovative and opens the role to interpretation and fit.

Because it’s incredibly lazy. We as an audience is already super tired of remakes and reboots, now you have to add in reimaginings.
Would you go watch a reimagining of the transformers movie if it’s somewhat a shot for shot remake with the director adding in his own touches here and there, but the selling point is Optimus Prime is purple and green instead of red and blue?

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Would you go watch a reimagining of the transformers movie if it’s somewhat a shot for shot remake with the director adding in his own touches here and there, but the selling point is Optimus Prime is purple and green instead of red and blue?

I'm bored of remakes too, but the selling point of the marketing doesn't have to be the equivalent for you. I don't care even a tiny bit how they market a movie. I just want to know if I'll enjoy it or not. There's no point or end to the frustration of worrying about what everyone else is doing.

 

[Starat327]

I'm bored of remakes too, but the selling point of the marketing doesn't have to be the equivalent for you. I don't care even a tiny bit how they market a movie. I just want to know if I'll enjoy it or not. There's no point or end to the frustration of worrying about what everyone else is doing.

I dont necessarily have a problem with remakes taking different races, genders, etc. As @Magua mentioned, the Hermione in Cursed child is african american, and I was perfectly ok with that. I mean, visually would i prefer to see Emma Watson? sure. but from a character standpoint? Inconsequential. My issue is when they take a story and bend it to fit a current agenda. I'll add a spoiler here in case someone hasnt seen it yet but wants to:

Spoiler: Spoiler

A good example is the new Aladdin film. In the original, Jasmine is looking for a prince to marry who she can love. In the new film, Jasmine is a wildly independent feminist-type, who doesnt want a prince at all because she wants to rule on her own. While I understand that doesn't distract totally from the original plot (a story that is, mind you, what? 1000 years old?) it does feel cheap to me. Instead of a classic tale potentially redone in live action (and fairly well done, ill be honest), we get a pro-female [ and to be clear, im not anti-female] version of the story who sees the protagonist fighting for the love of a woman who is choosing him because hes essentially ok with being the beta in a relationship. It just seems like unnecessary censorship to me. It doesnt make it right, but this is how it was a thousand years ago. Theres no reason to go off the board on a story just to make it fit with the current social agenda.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Spoiler: Spoiler

A good example is the new Aladdin film. In the original, Jasmine is looking for a prince to marry who she can love. In the new film, Jasmine is a wildly independent feminist-type, who doesnt want a prince at all because she wants to rule on her own. While I understand that doesn't distract totally from the original plot (a story that is, mind you, what? 1000 years old?) it does feel cheap to me. Instead of a classic tale potentially redone in live action (and fairly well done, ill be honest), we get a pro-female [ and to be clear, im not anti-female] version of the story who sees the protagonist fighting for the love of a woman who is choosing him because hes essentially ok with being the beta in a relationship. It just seems like unnecessary censorship to me. It doesnt make it right, but this is how it was a thousand years ago. Theres no reason to go off the board on a story just to make it fit with the current social agenda.

My philosophy is almost always that if it was done right, it wouldn't feel like a big deal. I haven't seen any version of that movie, so I can't speak to it.

My go-to example of this going wrong is "Baby, It's Cold Outside." There was a portion of people that read way more into it than the song ever meant and so the lyrics were redone, but in such a piss-poor way that it actually sounds more inappropriate to me now. It's amazing going from a song that was written to be sung by a husband and wife team at parties to winning an Oscar to whatever the hell we're at now.

 

[Starat327]

My philosophy is almost always that if it was done right, it wouldn't feel like a big deal. I haven't seen any version of that movie, so I can't speak to it.

My go-to example of this going wrong is "Baby, It's Cold Outside." There was a portion of people that read way more into it than the song ever meant and so the lyrics were redone, but in such a piss-poor way that it actually sounds more inappropriate to me now. It's amazing going from a song that was written to be sung by a husband and wife team at parties to winning an Oscar to whatever the hell we're at now.

Yeah, that's become an absolute abomination. There's a point where becoming 'too PC' is just too much. Again, i'm not condoning anything that this song is being accused of purveying, but I don't get this outcry to just erase history all the time. You can acknowledge that something is bad without feeling the need to pretend it never existed. /endrant

 

[Striiker]

It's pretty simple, if you want to make a movie with a black guy or a woman or a black women or whoever else, go for it. Create a new IP, write a story, make a good movie, and people will watch it. Don't take an existing IP and replace the established main character just so you can check boxes and score points with the people. They don't do these things to be innovative or for any reason other than being able to say they did it.

Dr Who is different because, unless I'm mistaken, in that universe the "Doctor" is reincarnated as different people, right? I've never seen it but that's my understanding from what I've heard and if that's true then I can understand being reincarnated as a different race/gender. On the other hand, James Bond is a white guy... changing that doesn't make any sense. Just like it wouldn't make sense to suddenly have these movies without James Bond. Just find a new Bond, as they always have, make new movies, and if you want you can write a spin-off in that universe with other agents and make them whatever race/gender you want.

TLDR: Add, don't replace.

 

[Fire Tortorella]

HF Weather team, whats going on this weekend?