“Whether Dr. Swann would have or should have revealed more skin does not matter to me. I was let down when she defended 007 with a shot to the big goon’s arm instead of his head. With all the unrealistic weapons handling and fantasy tactics, why not satisfy us women with one successful shot to the head to protect the hot man? Women ain’t blind. Success and satisfaction are great for everyone!! Keeping one’s ally alive is good in any book. C’mon Hollywood, give it to us ladies how we want it!” – TTAG commentator Ines Moorhouse underneath our post Movie Review: Spectre
You do realize that this is a James Bond movie, right? Part of the mystique is that he’s really the only competent one on screen the whole movie besides the villain.
My complaint is they turned this playboy spy into Jason Bourne. The character takes himself way too seriously now.
Actually the original books have Mr. Bond acting a lot more hardcore than he was portrayed in the movies. I preferred the newer scripts because they felt closer to the source material.
One can lay blame for the change at the feet of Mike Meyers, and the Austin Powers franchise. The Bond franchise people do.
Meyers’ and company packed so much into Powers films, that any attempt to do a ‘traditional’ Bond flick would just be seen as a joke. Albeit, not a funny nor profitable one.
Craig’s Bond films are the only ones I can stand to watch anymore. ‘Casino Royale’ cemented that.
I only hope they replace him with someone equally gritty.
Actually, you know what I’d like? A Bond film done by Michael Mann 🙂
I don’t know how “popular” realistic spy action would be, though.
Ahh I can see it now….
Bond and Moneypenny rolling in an Aston Martin Vantage S, through the streets of Saint-Tropez, while Phil Collins sings In the Air Tonight, fading in and out of foreground.
007 is a fictional character of a male, by a male, and for males.
Uh, because this time at least she didn’t shoot Bond like that ditz from the train scene. If you haven’t noticed, Bond women are very one dimension, and are only there for one thing; To inevitably screw Bond and keep us men drooling at the screen. Hollywood doesn’t need or want them to be characters of real merit.
Hollywood has sweet FA to do with Bond. They’re filmed in England (and on location throughout The Continent and the world).
Pinewood Studios made 22 of the 24 Bond Films.
I’m pretty sure that “Hollywood” as used here is like “Coke” or “Kleenex.” A movie is “Hollywood” even if it is filmed by a British studio.
Fair enough. But I felt like being pedantic, and there still are some separations betwixt and between.
Were Bond a Hollywood franchise there would certainly be much more nudity, and a host of other stylistic differences. (Which is interesting, because Europe has shed it’s prurient hang-ups about sex and nudity on tv/movies unlike the US.)
The TV and movies made in Europe are different than the ones made in SoCal. Much different vibe.
Thanks for the correction. I’m not enough of a movie goer to look for studios, so I just use it as a catch-all.
Remember that MGM clip with the roaring lion at the beginning of every bond film for the past 30 years or so? MGM was one of the original Hollywood movie studios. And UA (another Hollywood legacy) was the studio behind the Bond films before their merger with MGM in the mid ’80s.
Umm, not exactly…
Sadly, in our dumbed down public, they cannot tell enough difference between fiction and real life. Entertainment has always relied on some factor of suspended disbelief, but when it comes to firearm usage, most don’t have a clue how different what they saw on screen is versus real life.
Hence, after a fatal self defense shooting, the news always has some dim bulb quoted as saying, “why couldn’t he just shoot him in the leg?” The equally dim bulb reporter includes such nonsense since he or she doesn’t know anything either.
Bond women are solely there for T & A – deal with it.
Come on people, this has to do with equal pay for equal work. Hollywood pays men more than woman for doing the same work. Whether its defusing a nuclear or biological devices or just saving a country from a powerful business conglomerate bent on making the water dirty, men will always be paid more. Until Hollywood liberals get their acts together and start paying women fairly, I wouldn’t expect to see women taking the ultimate kill shot when the main actor, a man, still has bullets left in his pistol -which comes loaded with 800 rounds before the movie even starts.
It’s not sexism, it’s plot armor. That “goon” will likely become the rebooted series’ equivalent of Jaws, thus they can’t kill him in his first movie.
+1. That death was too easy, watch him return with some cheesy bio-mechanical upgrade. Maybe if we’re lucky, Bond will plug him for good with that Arsenal Arms 1911 and save the film from being an outright travesty.
Bond is a fun movie franchise where men get to live vicariously through an exciting character. It’s not meant to boost female egos. It’s why those few who want to make bond a woman are just idiots. That wouldn’t be bond.
I’ve often thought the contributions of women in the O.S.S. would make an interesting story. It would be great to have these stories told in an honest and thoughtful way.
Unfortunately, if it were made today, the women would suffer no physical or emotional challenges, never have to learn anything to be an expert at it, and single handily win the war because feminism thinks women must be pandered to like mentally ill children.
So I’d like to see it, but it can’t be made properly in the currently media climate.
And be named Mary Sue.
Gleaning ANYTHING from the latest Bond flicks is a mistake. I for one don’t buy the bloke Craig as a chick magnet. Just a burly spy. I did like the last 2 iterations for the non-stop action. Jason Bourne without the annoying Matt Damon. And when you crack a billion box office(before Spectre) you’re not going to derail the formulae(British spelling!)…
I don’t know what she’s complaining about, Tatiana Romanova saved Bond’s ass in “From Russia With Love” by shooting Rosa ‘Mc-Stabby-Shoes’ Klebb. (Although, she did shoot her in the back and not the head, so maybe that’s not good enough to count either…)
Peanut butter + chocolate = great idea
Guns + whiny SJWs = terrible idea
Damn these eyes, when exactly did someone get shot in the arm in that trailer?
It is not a filmmaker’s job to “satisfy” anyone (all right, you can stop snickering), except as it serves the story as a whole and its entertainment value. There are plenty of other movies with fascinating heroines in them (some of whom are excellent shots), so I’m not sure why one movie where a woman with an M.D. accompanies the world’s greatest spy into the supervillain’s lair, but can’t land a head shot in a crisis moment is cause for forehead wrinkles.This is a very specific gripe and I’m not even sure why we’re dignifying it by giving it oxygen here.
Besides, there are two much bigger gun problems with Spectre: loaded P226 and .380 > helicopter.