>1995 >depict a M's competence and authority over bond by having her reject his drink of choice and choose her own, something most people will barely register >2024 >Bond's car breaks down but luckily a strong powerful minority woman is around to help him bypass his fuel compressor
Wrong, it was the correct way to depict a competent woman and still have Bond be a womanizer.
Did you all miss when M was proven wrong many times by bond up to this point >didn’t want to trace the chopper >didn’t believe they had goldeneye >didn’t think Ouromov would be a traitor >still bond affectionately to come back alive
Dishonest. You know damn well with Barbara in charge, they wanted to portray her as being in the right and Bond sitting there as he's insulted establishes the cucked Bond we were about to watch, who's sexually dominated instead of dominating, who Moneypenny has gotten over and tells him what he's doing is sexual harassment and never smacks her in the butt playfully, he just accepts a woman ordering him around and doesn't question it. It was all the beginning of the end which crescendos with No Time To Die. It's over, bury it.
>he just accepts a woman ordering him around and doesn't question it
She is his superior you braindead neet. And the head of MI6 at the time was a woman.
A character like Bond would question it and go against her very appointment and what does that have to do with anything? M is called M because it's a man called Miles Messervy hence the M. No argument whatsoever to defend that scene which takes a shit all over Bond and the previous era by Barbara and Ferstein (()) who mandated M is a woman.
3 months ago
Anonymous
If the Bond movie was set in the 50s I might agree with you, but Goldeneye wasn't, it was set in modern times
Which by the way is why a modern bond can never work again, unless society drastically changes
I will admit that this was the start of the path that lead to where we are now
But I was happy with this balance. Judy Dench was good
3 months ago
Anonymous
>I will admit that this was the start of the path that lead to where we are now
woman M also inevitably lead to this atrocity.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>would question it and go against her very appointment
He's a commander dude. That's very low on the food chain. Since the first movie M berated Bond when he got uppity.
Did we watch different movies? >this could qualify as sexual harassment >really, and what’s the penalty for that? >one day you have to make good ones your innuendos
She’s acting the same as she always did, basically telling bond to frick her and stop teasing.
It was a very subversive scene. He rejects his classic advances, responds to the classic 'what would I do without you' with the most fricking unnecessarily passive aggresive 'you've never had me, james' and then to rebuke his le sexist manners by telling her ladies first she tells him to go first. I'm sorry but all this is textbook woke and pozz. Nothing changed. The 90's were rife with this but that's a pill people will not accept whatsoever.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>he doesn't like a woman who fights back a little
boring
3 months ago
Anonymous
Anon, that's an old as frick woman. Who gives a shit? Are you some kind of hag chaser?
3 months ago
Anonymous
We're talking about his flirting with Moneypenny anon
But since you asked, yes, I am a hagchaser.
3 months ago
Anonymous
She's not really attractive so it falls flat.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Anon, shut the frick up.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Am I wrong though? Caroline Bliss was cuter and more attractive with the nerdy girl with glasses look going on.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I don't get bogged down in the "who's hotter" weeds, I'll come in any consenting dicky
3 months ago
Anonymous
Cutting her hair into the Dyke cut in TND was a mistake
i'll agree it looked terrible on Brosnan's Moneypenny but the tomboy haircut is supreme when on the right girl.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Cutting her hair into the Dyke cut in TND was a mistake
3 months ago
Anonymous
the Dyke cut is ALWAYS a mistake
3 months ago
Anonymous
Hollywood killing redheads should be punishable by death.
just ctrl+f "barbara" and you find his rambling in 90% of bond threads, he's probably some youtuber with 30 subscribers making daily videos of seething
>Person articulates himself pretty eloquently about what he believes >mentally ill >speaking well and concisely about what you think is mental illness
I want off this rock.
He was absolutely right and expressed himself very eloquently, you're just too stupid to understand him. Bond is written by people who hate Bond. They hate what they think he represents, they hate what they politically project onto him, and they relish in humiliating him, because the purpose of Bond as a character is to put down men and put over women. Obviously, this is a childish and petty approach to writing, which is why all these movies suck.
Thank you for being a person with a head on their shoulders. I suspect people don't want to admit that from when they were kids, these malicious things they only became aware of in adulthood were always there. It's quite the mindfrick for sure which is why I'm understanding but they got to wake up sometime.
he keeps talking about himself in the 3rd person, absolute nutcase
Bond fell off when it became less interested I adapting an Ian Fleming novel and more interested in making another Bond movie
You can see it begin in the Connery era
True but it regained artistic integrity and the franchise had it's best movies with the short but sweet Timothy Dalton era. That's why it's the end of the Bond franchise, the rest are soulless continuations.
That only applies to TLD, which was not done because of woke reasons but because of the ongoing AIDS pandemic at the time and they wanted to lay off the promiscuity for one movie and female skin and sexuality returned in LTK along with the series' most hard edged story.
Been over a decade since I watched it but I think in the end of LTK he drops his date because his female companion cried and then they had a really gay water splash or something.
I was really pissed at it?
You can even see the effect of the movie on the novel. Fleming seems to be chasing after film Bond in You Only Live Twice as the plot turns absurd compared to the previous novels.
as opposed to what the surface level observers always get wrong about this scene, is that it's about M being seen as a cold, calculative bean counter who doesn't care about the agents she sends to die, so she does the same thing to bond, giving out her unfiltered surface level observation of 007, even though she full well knows, and bond knows, how they are both important to one another.
The buzzwords are what make this scene grating. If she just said irritating, womanizing dinosaur then no one would really care but it's the use of those buzzwords that betray the politcally charged intention of the creators acknowledging post modern and malicious readings of the character by the bugman status quo which started in the 90's after the Cold War ending established total globalist hegemony in the world.
>it's the use of those buzzwords >acknowledging post modern and malicious readings of the character by the bugman status quo which started in the 90's after the Cold War ending established total globalist hegemony
It's actually impressive that you were able to write sentence without realizing how moronic that was.
He was absolutely right and expressed himself very eloquently, you're just too stupid to understand him. Bond is written by people who hate Bond. They hate what they think he represents, they hate what they politically project onto him, and they relish in humiliating him, because the purpose of Bond as a character is to put down men and put over women. Obviously, this is a childish and petty approach to writing, which is why all these movies suck.
Thank you for being a person with a head on their shoulders. I suspect people don't want to admit that from when they were kids, these malicious things they only became aware of in adulthood were always there. It's quite the mindfrick for sure which is why I'm understanding but they got to wake up sometime.
nta but any time i get an almost immediate, long response i skim it for buzzwords to see if it's an obvious response from someone who read the first 1-3 words and went on some rambling tangent like that guy.
How people as braindead like you exist is proof enough there's no hope. You present no argument and dismiss what others say. Is that piece of text that fricking hard to read? You must be American and Gen Z.
What an absolutely terrific theme, the best after the classic era. You Know My Name is great even though it sounded like some Transformers/Spider-Man song over James Bond I felt back then. Oh well..
Not at all.
This was a basic establishing scene to show that the new M was a c**t who didn't think much of 007, BUT she was also smart enough to establish trust in her operatives by being honest about where they stand.
If this was Daniel Craig Bond, he would have apologized for being born a man and gone off to hang out with his buddies in some gay bar.
Peirce Brosnan Bond did have to put up with the new M, but he also got to have fight-foreplay with Onatopp and got to frick Natalia as well.
You try to rationalize it but having read everything there is to read behind the development of this idea by the creatives I can't accept any reading other than the obvious which is political virtue signaling and the emasculation of Bond even if it's only somewhat. It set a bad precedent and was a small taste of what whas to come and you are right, she did mellow the frick out in the other Brosnan movies but I always felt Brosnan was too classic a Bond to have such a subversive element in his movies. I wouldn't mind if it was in the already ruined Craig movies but it becomes jarring if it's in otherwise very classical James Bond adventures, like a lump stuck in your throat. You just can sense it's Barbara testing the waters before pulling the rug underneath your feet which is why, as bad as it was but otherwise harmless in the Brosnan era, it was the beginning of the end and lead to Craig as you pointed out. It's a catalyst scene.
You get it, and I would wager so does 99% of people who saw the film, the way this always comes up in 90% of the threads on Cinemaphile is just endemic of the fact that the threads about this get spammed by the same schizo
You try to rationalize it but having read everything there is to read behind the development of this idea by the creatives I can't accept any reading other than the obvious which is political virtue signaling and the emasculation of Bond even if it's only somewhat. It set a bad precedent and was a small taste of what whas to come and you are right, she did mellow the frick out in the other Brosnan movies but I always felt Brosnan was too classic a Bond to have such a subversive element in his movies. I wouldn't mind if it was in the already ruined Craig movies but it becomes jarring if it's in otherwise very classical James Bond adventures, like a lump stuck in your throat. You just can sense it's Barbara testing the waters before pulling the rug underneath your feet which is why, as bad as it was but otherwise harmless in the Brosnan era, it was the beginning of the end and lead to Craig as you pointed out. It's a catalyst scene.
It's the politically charged nature of it all. >LOOK BOND LE SEXIST IS BEING BOSSED AROUND BY A WOMAN THIS IS SO BRAVE
Barbara took over in this movie and it shows. M was never hateful towards 007 or this charged and personal about it, it was quaint all things considered especially with the M that came before her, the great Robert Brown. It's Barbara and her (()) writers feeling courageous so to speak from the third wave feminism shit and globohomosexual taking shape after the CW that lead to this. You may think it's rather harmless and that the Bond movies after were not affected but that's a short sighted view on it. Look at the franchise now. It's deader than dead. This scene lead to that.
probably this guy, just non stop rambling about some crap nobody bothers reading
>you just shut up, other people and the majority agree there's nothing wrong with it so just shut up you're a schizo, insane, rambling madman and I won't listen to you, you are wrong and insane, the status quo and zeitgest said that's not true so it isn't. just stop talking.
That clip ends before the part where she tells him to come back alive while giving him a small smile. I get the sentiment behind hating it, but I don't think it's as bad as some of you make it out to be.
It is awful, but rewatching all of the M scenes, he’s frequently had a stick up his ass and takes it out on Bond. The difference seems to be the personal attack on his character.
It's the politically charged nature of it all. >LOOK BOND LE SEXIST IS BEING BOSSED AROUND BY A WOMAN THIS IS SO BRAVE
Barbara took over in this movie and it shows. M was never hateful towards 007 or this charged and personal about it, it was quaint all things considered especially with the M that came before her, the great Robert Brown. It's Barbara and her (()) writers feeling courageous so to speak from the third wave feminism shit and globohomosexual taking shape after the CW that lead to this. You may think it's rather harmless and that the Bond movies after were not affected but that's a short sighted view on it. Look at the franchise now. It's deader than dead. This scene lead to that.
Wrong, it was the correct way to depict a competent woman and still have Bond be a womanizer.
Stop slurping on the nostalgia kool-aid and see it for what it is.
>and see it for what it is
>my interpretation is the only correct one
based moron
Barbara Broccoli, known feminist nepo baby and complete sloth and Bruce ((Ferstein)) were the ones who made M a woman. Nothing more needs to be said.
>1995
>depict a M's competence and authority over bond by having her reject his drink of choice and choose her own, something most people will barely register
>2024
>Bond's car breaks down but luckily a strong powerful minority woman is around to help him bypass his fuel compressor
M is not a woman, end of. It's egregiously woke and pozzed and it led the path to today. I don't care how you N64 playing millennials justify this.
Did you all miss when M was proven wrong many times by bond up to this point
>didn’t want to trace the chopper
>didn’t believe they had goldeneye
>didn’t think Ouromov would be a traitor
>still bond affectionately to come back alive
Dishonest. You know damn well with Barbara in charge, they wanted to portray her as being in the right and Bond sitting there as he's insulted establishes the cucked Bond we were about to watch, who's sexually dominated instead of dominating, who Moneypenny has gotten over and tells him what he's doing is sexual harassment and never smacks her in the butt playfully, he just accepts a woman ordering him around and doesn't question it. It was all the beginning of the end which crescendos with No Time To Die. It's over, bury it.
>he just accepts a woman ordering him around and doesn't question it
She is his superior you braindead neet. And the head of MI6 at the time was a woman.
A character like Bond would question it and go against her very appointment and what does that have to do with anything? M is called M because it's a man called Miles Messervy hence the M. No argument whatsoever to defend that scene which takes a shit all over Bond and the previous era by Barbara and Ferstein (()) who mandated M is a woman.
If the Bond movie was set in the 50s I might agree with you, but Goldeneye wasn't, it was set in modern times
Which by the way is why a modern bond can never work again, unless society drastically changes
I will admit that this was the start of the path that lead to where we are now
But I was happy with this balance. Judy Dench was good
>I will admit that this was the start of the path that lead to where we are now
woman M also inevitably lead to this atrocity.
>would question it and go against her very appointment
He's a commander dude. That's very low on the food chain. Since the first movie M berated Bond when he got uppity.
Did we watch different movies?
>this could qualify as sexual harassment
>really, and what’s the penalty for that?
>one day you have to make good ones your innuendos
She’s acting the same as she always did, basically telling bond to frick her and stop teasing.
It was a very subversive scene. He rejects his classic advances, responds to the classic 'what would I do without you' with the most fricking unnecessarily passive aggresive 'you've never had me, james' and then to rebuke his le sexist manners by telling her ladies first she tells him to go first. I'm sorry but all this is textbook woke and pozz. Nothing changed. The 90's were rife with this but that's a pill people will not accept whatsoever.
>he doesn't like a woman who fights back a little
boring
Anon, that's an old as frick woman. Who gives a shit? Are you some kind of hag chaser?
We're talking about his flirting with Moneypenny anon
But since you asked, yes, I am a hagchaser.
She's not really attractive so it falls flat.
Anon, shut the frick up.
Am I wrong though? Caroline Bliss was cuter and more attractive with the nerdy girl with glasses look going on.
I don't get bogged down in the "who's hotter" weeds, I'll come in any consenting dicky
i'll agree it looked terrible on Brosnan's Moneypenny but the tomboy haircut is supreme when on the right girl.
Cutting her hair into the Dyke cut in TND was a mistake
the Dyke cut is ALWAYS a mistake
Hollywood killing redheads should be punishable by death.
I DESERVE redheads with upturned noses.
Holy frick, you're mentally ill.
>Person articulates himself pretty eloquently about what he believes
>mentally ill
>speaking well and concisely about what you think is mental illness
I want off this rock.
>being mentally ill means you can't communicate your deranged thoughts concisely
Why am I wrong? Explain it to me yourself. Now.
just ctrl+f "barbara" and you find his rambling in 90% of bond threads, he's probably some youtuber with 30 subscribers making daily videos of seething
he keeps talking about himself in the 3rd person, absolute nutcase
this is what you are dealing with, Cinemaphile
t. misogynist dinosaur
And?
Yesh.
Bond fell off when it became less interested I adapting an Ian Fleming novel and more interested in making another Bond movie
You can see it begin in the Connery era
True but it regained artistic integrity and the franchise had it's best movies with the short but sweet Timothy Dalton era. That's why it's the end of the Bond franchise, the rest are soulless continuations.
Also, Pam.
Have you even watched the movies? Dalton was a massive softie. Brosnan was a return to macho bond.
That only applies to TLD, which was not done because of woke reasons but because of the ongoing AIDS pandemic at the time and they wanted to lay off the promiscuity for one movie and female skin and sexuality returned in LTK along with the series' most hard edged story.
Been over a decade since I watched it but I think in the end of LTK he drops his date because his female companion cried and then they had a really gay water splash or something.
I was really pissed at it?
Why on earth were you pissed at SOVL? It was a beautiful moment of affection.
You can even see the effect of the movie on the novel. Fleming seems to be chasing after film Bond in You Only Live Twice as the plot turns absurd compared to the previous novels.
as opposed to what the surface level observers always get wrong about this scene, is that it's about M being seen as a cold, calculative bean counter who doesn't care about the agents she sends to die, so she does the same thing to bond, giving out her unfiltered surface level observation of 007, even though she full well knows, and bond knows, how they are both important to one another.
The buzzwords are what make this scene grating. If she just said irritating, womanizing dinosaur then no one would really care but it's the use of those buzzwords that betray the politcally charged intention of the creators acknowledging post modern and malicious readings of the character by the bugman status quo which started in the 90's after the Cold War ending established total globalist hegemony in the world.
>it's the use of those buzzwords
>acknowledging post modern and malicious readings of the character by the bugman status quo which started in the 90's after the Cold War ending established total globalist hegemony
It's actually impressive that you were able to write sentence without realizing how moronic that was.
No argument. Stick your head in the sand.
He was absolutely right and expressed himself very eloquently, you're just too stupid to understand him. Bond is written by people who hate Bond. They hate what they think he represents, they hate what they politically project onto him, and they relish in humiliating him, because the purpose of Bond as a character is to put down men and put over women. Obviously, this is a childish and petty approach to writing, which is why all these movies suck.
Thank you for being a person with a head on their shoulders. I suspect people don't want to admit that from when they were kids, these malicious things they only became aware of in adulthood were always there. It's quite the mindfrick for sure which is why I'm understanding but they got to wake up sometime.
nta but any time i get an almost immediate, long response i skim it for buzzwords to see if it's an obvious response from someone who read the first 1-3 words and went on some rambling tangent like that guy.
>rambling tangent
How people as braindead like you exist is proof enough there's no hope. You present no argument and dismiss what others say. Is that piece of text that fricking hard to read? You must be American and Gen Z.
GOLDENEYE, I FOUND HIS WEAKNESS
What an absolutely terrific theme, the best after the classic era. You Know My Name is great even though it sounded like some Transformers/Spider-Man song over James Bond I felt back then. Oh well..
Yes but also godamn Pierce Brosnan is an awful actor
Not at all.
This was a basic establishing scene to show that the new M was a c**t who didn't think much of 007, BUT she was also smart enough to establish trust in her operatives by being honest about where they stand.
If this was Daniel Craig Bond, he would have apologized for being born a man and gone off to hang out with his buddies in some gay bar.
Peirce Brosnan Bond did have to put up with the new M, but he also got to have fight-foreplay with Onatopp and got to frick Natalia as well.
But all it shows is that the Mi6 is a joke with Mommy issues
>You're a misogynistic sexist dinosaur and I have no problem sending you to die.
>......Point taken.
Absolute cuck shit hahahaha
You try to rationalize it but having read everything there is to read behind the development of this idea by the creatives I can't accept any reading other than the obvious which is political virtue signaling and the emasculation of Bond even if it's only somewhat. It set a bad precedent and was a small taste of what whas to come and you are right, she did mellow the frick out in the other Brosnan movies but I always felt Brosnan was too classic a Bond to have such a subversive element in his movies. I wouldn't mind if it was in the already ruined Craig movies but it becomes jarring if it's in otherwise very classical James Bond adventures, like a lump stuck in your throat. You just can sense it's Barbara testing the waters before pulling the rug underneath your feet which is why, as bad as it was but otherwise harmless in the Brosnan era, it was the beginning of the end and lead to Craig as you pointed out. It's a catalyst scene.
You get it, and I would wager so does 99% of people who saw the film, the way this always comes up in 90% of the threads on Cinemaphile is just endemic of the fact that the threads about this get spammed by the same schizo
probably this guy, just non stop rambling about some crap nobody bothers reading
>you just shut up, other people and the majority agree there's nothing wrong with it so just shut up you're a schizo, insane, rambling madman and I won't listen to you, you are wrong and insane, the status quo and zeitgest said that's not true so it isn't. just stop talking.
you're not even human.
>10+ commas + buzzwords + all lowercase
Keep typing your insane babble that nobody will read.
No argument and projecting. Answer with an argument or have a nice day. NOW.
That clip ends before the part where she tells him to come back alive while giving him a small smile. I get the sentiment behind hating it, but I don't think it's as bad as some of you make it out to be.
It is awful, but rewatching all of the M scenes, he’s frequently had a stick up his ass and takes it out on Bond. The difference seems to be the personal attack on his character.
It's the politically charged nature of it all.
>LOOK BOND LE SEXIST IS BEING BOSSED AROUND BY A WOMAN THIS IS SO BRAVE
Barbara took over in this movie and it shows. M was never hateful towards 007 or this charged and personal about it, it was quaint all things considered especially with the M that came before her, the great Robert Brown. It's Barbara and her (()) writers feeling courageous so to speak from the third wave feminism shit and globohomosexual taking shape after the CW that lead to this. You may think it's rather harmless and that the Bond movies after were not affected but that's a short sighted view on it. Look at the franchise now. It's deader than dead. This scene lead to that.