|
|
Post by Spooky Ghost Ackbar on Sept 22, 2021 17:35:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Sept 22, 2021 20:24:54 GMT
He is 100% correct.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 22, 2021 22:17:03 GMT
We did get a "female James Bond" with Charlize Theron in "Atomic Blonde." The movie was very successful at the box office which should have shown producers that female action stars can compete in the marketplace even if they are not part of an established franchise.
"Widows" (2018) led by African-American women was also wildly successful. Why don't studios follow with other great scripts and stories to capitalize on these hits? Perhaps to a certain extent they have with "Black Panther" and "Aquaman" starring an actor with Native Hawaiian ancestry on his father's side.
Surely now they can do better than just plugging a female actor into a traditionally male slot.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonesjxd on Sept 23, 2021 10:34:52 GMT
I'm pretty sure it was news a few years ago that the producers said James Bond would remain a man, and I think it's likely we're only a few years away from news breaking that Christopher Nolan will be rebooting James Bond, and he strikes me as a man so afraid of women his wife probably had to talk him into having sex on their wedding night. Daniel Craig is correct, but it's a complete non-issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by femalefan on Sept 23, 2021 10:50:32 GMT
He's right. Bond was written as a man and should remain a male in the movie franchise. Hollywood should make their own female Bond like character if they want a female spy movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason143 on Sept 23, 2021 10:56:12 GMT
We did get a "female James Bond" with Charlize Theron in "Atomic Blonde." The movie was very successful at the box office which should have shown producers that female action stars can compete in the marketplace even if they are not part of an established franchise. "Widows" (2018) led by African-American women was also wildly successful. Surely now they can do better than just plugging a female actor into a traditionally male slot. Widows wasnt successful, $42 million budget grossing $76 million worldwide is a flop. Sicario, with Emily Blunt as the lead, was comparably more successful - $30 million budget grossing $85 million worldwide which is why it got a sequel and Widows didnt. Atomic Blonde did the best though and is getting 2 more sequels.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason143 on Sept 23, 2021 10:57:54 GMT
I'm pretty sure it was news a few years ago that the producers said James Bond would remain a man, and I think it's likely we're only a few years away from news breaking that Christopher Nolan will be rebooting James Bond, and he strikes me as a man so afraid of women his wife probably had to talk him into having sex on their wedding night. Daniel Craig is correct, but it's a complete non-issue. Why would you say that 
|
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on Sept 23, 2021 11:19:32 GMT
We did get a "female James Bond" with Charlize Theron in "Atomic Blonde." The movie was very successful at the box office which should have shown producers that female action stars can compete in the marketplace even if they are not part of an established franchise. "Widows" (2018) led by African-American women was also wildly successful. Why don't studios follow with other great scripts and stories to capitalize on these hits? Perhaps to a certain extent they have with "Black Panther" and "Aquaman" starring an actor with Native Hawaiian ancestry on his father's side. Surely now they can do better than just plugging a female actor into a traditionally male slot. Atomic Blonde might be getting a Netflix sequel, which is yet to be confirmed, it's not getting a theatrical release. If it made money, it should have gotten a theatrical release. Widows wasn't sucessful either. As one poster pointed, it flopped. |
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 23, 2021 13:19:00 GMT
We did get a "female James Bond" with Charlize Theron in "Atomic Blonde." The movie was very successful at the box office which should have shown producers that female action stars can compete in the marketplace even if they are not part of an established franchise. "Widows" (2018) led by African-American women was also wildly successful. Why don't studios follow with other great scripts and stories to capitalize on these hits? Perhaps to a certain extent they have with "Black Panther" and "Aquaman" starring an actor with Native Hawaiian ancestry on his father's side. Surely now they can do better than just plugging a female actor into a traditionally male slot. Atomic Blonde might be getting a Netflix sequel, which is yet to be confirmed, it's not getting a theatrical release. If it made money, it should have gotten a theatrical release. Widows wasn't sucessful either. As one poster pointed, it flopped. Widows grossed $76 million against a budget of $42 million. It just about made up its budget in the U.S. which may be what the poster was referring to. Worldwide distribution made up the rest. It has a 91% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason143 on Sept 23, 2021 13:33:01 GMT
Atomic Blonde might be getting a Netflix sequel, which is yet to be confirmed, it's not getting a theatrical release. If it made money, it should have gotten a theatrical release. Widows wasn't sucessful either. As one poster pointed, it flopped. Widows grossed $76 million against a budget of $42 million. It just about made up its budget in the U.S. which may be what the poster was referring to. Worldwide distribution made up the rest. It has a 91% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Making less than double your budget is a fail, especially considering advertising costs. And rotten tomatoes has no credibility left.
|
|
|
|
Post by thebayharborbutcher on Sept 23, 2021 14:17:17 GMT
Personally I don’t really have an issue if they cast a woman in the role. A good movie is a good movie. If they can make a good movie with a female lead than I say go for it. I do agree though they should develop new roles for women.
That all being said, I do think Amazon has a great opportunity here to develop a 007 female lead spinoff tv series for their streaming service.
|
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Sept 23, 2021 16:46:19 GMT
I just don't get how it would work even on a hypothetical level. If the character's no longer male than it just isn't James Bond anymore, no matter what anyone says. It would be like doing a Sex and the City reboot with a male main character and trying to pretend it's still the same character Sarah Jessica Parker played.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2021 16:57:06 GMT
I'm pretty sure it was news a few years ago that the producers said James Bond would remain a man, and I think it's likely we're only a few years away from news breaking that Christopher Nolan will be rebooting James Bond, and he strikes me as a man so afraid of women his wife probably had to talk him into having sex on their wedding night. Daniel Craig is correct, but it's a complete non-issue. I hope Nolan casts Cavill as 007. However, I have a feeling he’d cast Tom Hardy due to their history. |
|
