Are these female lead remakes are getting out of hand now?

Tools    





I wouldn't be upset if there was a male version of Jane Eyre or anything that is typically female..

I'm willing to accept change. I know some who aren't!
I believe you....I mean in general, there would be backlash if Jane Eyre was made a man.

As far as Bond films go, I stopped watching them after Roger Moore, so personally I don't care what they do with the franchise. I'd be more interested in watching a 'Bond' film if it was about agent 006 who's a woman and set in the early 1960s during the height of the cold war.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
When you say people are using racism or poltics as excuses, excuses for what exactly? I thought that some movies actually were trying to make political statements through gender swapping, and I didn't have it as an excuse for anything. So what would that excuse be?



When you say people are using racism or poltics as excuses, excuses for what exactly? I thought that some movies actually were trying to make political statements through gender swapping, and I didn't have it as an excuse for anything. So what would that excuse be?
are you willing to accept change? do you see every freaking change as politically motivated? I sure in the heck don't.... I see people who are a double standard, who look for things to be their way...if anything changes from the norm.. they immediately throw "politically motivated" or "racism" in it..

I think you like to be a bit controversial in all these threads you make... I think you enjoy looking for reason to argue about things....

Any discussion on politics or racism or any of the topics like this, there is never a healthy discussion...Never!

Edit:

And seriously, I really dont care what you think of what I said...

I enjoy movies for what they are.. entertainment.

Who cares if a man or woman is playing a character different than what the book says or what the norm says or society..



People who use racism or political excuses are sad in my opinion. You will never accept change in any form if you think this way.
How is it racism or politics if someone wants a fictional character to remain more or less as its been described in the original works and has been for the last 50 years? Especially if the said someone would have no objection for similar new character being of another sex and/or race.



We've gone on holiday by mistake
Agreed, that's more or less what I was trying to say.

If I was making the next Bond film and wanted a female lead, I would tell the story of another 00 agent. We know James Bond is agent #7, so why not a movie about one of his fellow agents?
Was going to say something like this. The last decent Bond film as far as I'm concerned had a 00 agent as a villain. So why not go that route again, as a villain again or even a fellow agent leading to its own spinoff.

Having a female Bond though LOL nope, do that and you'll be going woke and broke.
__________________



How is it racism or politics if someone wants a fictional character to remain more or less as its been described in the original works and has been for the last 50 years? Especially if the said someone would have no objection for similar new character being of another sex and/or race.
go back and read what he said.. he calls these changes in characters in movies like the new
"Ghostbusters" and "Ocean's 8" using all-female cast are politically motivated.

and he said that James Bond character couldn't be changed to a woman because James Bond is promiscuous and no one can accept a woman being that way..



go back and read what he said.. he calls these changes in characters in movies like the new
"Ghostbusters" and "Ocean's 8" using all-female cast are politically motivated.

and he said that James Bond character couldn't be changed to a woman because James Bond is promiscuous and no one can accept a woman being that way..
So does this mean that non-political, non-racist reasons to oppose changes in fictional characters (at least well established ones like James Bond) are valid or at least understandable in your opinion? Because I'm kinda getting the "change is progress, change everything" vibe from some messages in this thread.

Also I do agree with @ironpony on political (or ideological) motivation behind those all-female remakes. On the other hand I do disagree with his reasons to oppose female James Bond (but still oppose the idea due to fact that James Bond is well established white male hero). And just for the record, I do like the concept of female action heroes and would like to see more good ones.



So does this mean that non-political, non-racist reasons to oppose changes in fictional characters (at least well established ones like James Bond) are valid or at least understandable in your opinion? Because I'm kinda getting the "change is progress, change everything" vibe from some messages in this thread.

Also I do agree with @ironpony on political (or ideological) motivation behind those all-female remakes. On the other hand I do disagree with his reasons to oppose female James Bond (but still oppose the idea due to fact that James Bond is well established white male hero). And just for the record, I do like the concept of female action heroes and would like to see more good ones.
I think the changes have nothing to do with politics but I think he's trying to find a reason to get people to argue... and like I said... There is never a healthy argument because it's all based on opinions...

There is too much drama in politics.... and like they say... Opinions are like a$$holes.. everyone has one and they all stink.

I don't mind if they change a character from male to female or vise versa...

if you like female action heroes, go see "Peppermint".

Y'all want to argue about this.. .go for it.. but it's my opinion, it's all stupid.



You can't make a rainbow without a little rain.
I believe you....I mean in general, there would be backlash if Jane Eyre was made a man.

As far as Bond films go, I stopped watching them after Roger Moore, so personally I don't care what they do with the franchise. I'd be more interested in watching a 'Bond' film if it was about agent 006 who's a woman and set in the early 1960s during the height of the cold war.

We already know Agent 006. He was in the movie GoldenEye, (with Pierce Brosnan as James Bond). Agent 006's name is Alec Trevelyan, and he was played by Sean Bean.

If you haven't seen GoldenEye, you should give it a try. It's by far the best of the Brosnan Bond movies.



are you willing to accept change? do you see every freaking change as politically motivated? I sure in the heck don't.... I see people who are a double standard, who look for things to be their way...if anything changes from the norm.. they immediately throw "politically motivated" or "racism" in it..
I'll give you an example of where politics, especially the current political climate in the UK, has entered into things.

Steven Moffat, the outgoing showrunner of Doctor Who, spoke at the end of his tenure about not casting a female Doctor. He said it hadn't been the right time and that "[Doctor Who] is also for people who voted Brexit. That's not me politically at all – but we have to keep everyone on board".

This was demonizing viewers who had voted the opposite way to him, and insinuating any number of other 'character flaws' that would make these viewers stop watching because of a female Doctor.



You’re arguing that applying a political message to something that wasn’t “meant” to be political diminishes the product?
No. But if you change a character primarily out of a political agenda and not because you are simply inspired to do so... this isn't a good scenario. It doesn't have to be bad, but chances are great and it's harder to accept. You're talking more generally about political messages... however it's specifically about forcing well established characters to change significantly - inspired primarily by politics, without context in the story itself. Which disturbs the coherence of the story and it's world.

Again double standards? Today's woman isnt anything like what it was like in my Grandmother or Mother's time...
Ain't a double standard. If a woman seduces many men, it's a very different thing for the audience... the male part (majority I assume) can no longer identify with the main figure as a ladies-man but only with the "being seduced" role, which I think is less appealing for them.
I personally don't care about that part of James Bond, could watch a movie without "womanizing" with no issues.
I guess even for the female audience it will be strange because if something has been a certain way for decades it's hard to immediately accept a complete U-Turn, especially when the original is being "taken away" for it's sake.
+ Women on average are more comfortable with the "being seduced" role and for men vice versa. Not allowed to post links...



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Well I think if they are going to have a female James Bond, they should have her be a "manizer", as I feel that is true to the character, and I would be much less interested in a female James Bond, if they were to take that away. I would feel what's the point of doing a female James Bond, if the character is going to lose his/her traits in the process.

Bond is a homme fatale womanizer, so it would make sense to make a female Bond a femme fatale manizer.

Audiences have accepted femme fatales manizers before, it's just usually they are villains in movies, where as they would just have to make it the heroine instead. Is that do-able with audiences?

Basically a lot of fans like me, like the traditional Bond formula. So if they were to do it with a female Bond, they should have her start out in bed with a man, during the first act, before the new plot opens up more and gets more heavy.

Then along the way she hooks up with another man on the mission, who either turns out to be bad, or ends up getting killed, then along the way, she hooks up with the last guy she ends the story with, in defeating the villain with.

Could they do that for a female James Bond?



Audiences have accepted femme fatales manizers before, it's just usually they are villains in movies, where as they would just have to make it the heroine instead. Is that do-able with audiences?
Actually sounds interesting...
But dammit, not as Jane Bond haha. A totally new character would be the way to go. One that leans on the James Bond aesthetic, style and legacy but not just James Bond with a sex-change. That's just kinda cheap... Jane Bond sounds more like a James Bond copy, cooked for 10-14 year old girls IMO.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Yep for sure, I would like to see it with a new character. The closest the came in my opinion was the movie Haywire. In that one, the girl seduces the guy by undoing his pants immediately, without even kissing him first. I thought this was a major breakthrough as female action heroines always start off slower it seems, but she goes right for the pants, and she is a heroine and not a villain.

But they couldn't have her go for multiple men throughout the movie though still, like James Bond.



Yep for sure, I would like to see it with a new character. The closest the came in my opinion was the movie Haywire.
I was thinking of Haywire all the way through this discussion .

In that one, the girl seduces the guy by undoing his pants immediately, without even kissing him first. I thought this was a major breakthrough as female action heroines always start off slower it seems, but she goes right for the pants, and she is a heroine and not a villain.
That's my kind of breakthrough .



Make the next Jane Eyre movie with a man as Jane Eyre and see if women don't get pissed that Hollywood is treading on their cherished role models.
Doubt that women would care (I wouldn’t), but would his name be Jane?
__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.



the girl seduces the guy by undoing his pants immediately, without even kissing him first. I thought this was a major breakthrough as female action heroines always start off slower it seems, but she goes right for the pants, and she is a heroine and not a villain.
Oof, this is a “major breakthrough”? Someone gets a hand or blow job without being kissed first? Thrilling.



You certainly wouldn't think so via Hollywood were they still make up the majority of the heroic characters whilst foreigners are still more likely to be cast as badguys.

I watch movie after movie after movie where the good guys are evenly split between male and female, but every single bad guy is male. Every last one. The perception given by Hollywood is that only men can be evil. Look at Black Panther. Every single woman in the movie (except a single incredibly minor character, who is a girlfriend of a bad guy) is a good guy on the good side. All of the bad guys are male. Every single one except for the single minor character. What are the odds? Infinitesimal, unless you believe that women are inherently good while men are much, much, much more predisposed towards evil.


This is also directly related to my other Hollywood gender complaint: the rate of death of men and women in movies. Men die at great rates, all of the time. However, when a woman dies, it is a dramatic and rare event. Last week, I watched Hotel Artemis. There are exactly three women in the movie and about 40 or so men. Spoiler: Every single woman lives and only two men live. Despite the vast disparity in gender represented in the movie, more women live than the men. Not a single woman dies. It is o.k. for nearly all of the men to die, though, because they are evil. There is one killer for hire evil woman, but she gets to live as well.



Another great example is the Divergent movie (the first one). Despite the fact that men and women are shown to be equally represented in the various factions, if you watch closely, nearly every single person killing other people is male (because, remember, men are evil) and nearly every single person who is shown dying is male (because, remember, it is o.k. to kill men). When the protagonist's mother dies, the entire movie stops in the middle of a battle for a couple of minutes so that we can say goodbye to the mother. (You know, because a woman's death is dramatic). However, when the protagonist's father dies a little later in the movie, the protagonist basically shrugs it off. There is no dramatic goodbye, the movie doesn't stop and it is almost as if nobody cares. Watch the movie closely with this in mind and you will see it.



This stuff has been going on for years and years. Kids watch these movies and, subconsciously for most, consciously for some, they are left with the impression that men are evil. It is no wonder there is so much hate for men from the Left these days.



every single bad guy is male. Every last one. The perception given by Hollywood is that only men can be evil.
Guess you’ve never seen Fatal Attraction, The Postman Always Rings Twice, Double Indemnity, Bonnie & Clyde, Black Widow, etc., etc.