Time’s up for James Bond: is 007 too toxic for the #MeToo era?
In truth, early Bond films were considered problematic long before the #MeTooand Time’s Up campaigns – and not just for their celebration of sexist attitudes. […]
If we do enjoy Bond for his dark side, perhaps it is time to accept that this most enduring of characters no longer fits the archetype of a hero. It would be much easier to accept his spiky edges if the dapper secret agent were not sold as the epitome of British suavity and a role model for young men. […]
Mainstream Hollywood is now more complex than it was in the 1960s and 70s. Is it possible for characters who do not fit the traditional heroic template to flourish today? Case in point: last year’s Logan, which easily had the best depiction of Hugh Jackman’s antiheroic Wolverine, despite his hideous crimes of the past. Tom Hiddleston’s Loki is, when on form, Marvel’s most watchable creation,
None of the above characters are role models, and maybe Bond fans must accept that 007 isn’t either. Just because we do not always approve of his behaviour does not mean we cannot continue to enjoy his adventures.
Why does everything have to be PC? Why can’t we have complex characters who aren’t perfect? Fuck does everyone have to be a feminists wet fucking dream?
I love me some 007 so obviously feel the need to throw my totally unasked for opinion into the ring.
I’ve never considered Bond anything but the sexist, misogynist dinosaur he is as labelled by M. He is a fictional character and, as even pointed out by the real head of MI6, as far as you can get from the reality of working for the SIS as possible. He is an escapism. He was even such for his creator. Interestingly, when this popped up on my timeline I’d just read a piece about Three Billboards, its flawed characters and the thought of the “requirement for a redemption arc” in our storytelling. Redeeming bad characters should not be a prerequisite of storytelling. Bond is what he is. One part of the Three Billboards piece struck me:
“It is important to, at least on occasion, portray the humanity of people who do terrible things. This is not because we should excuse them, but because the false belief that people cannot both do nice things and be guilty of something terrible is still one that runs rampant, as seen in the fallacious defense from friends or co-workers that more often than not crop up in response to things like assault allegations.”
The fact is there are sexist, misogynist dinosaurs out there. No one needs them, but they exist anyway. Bond has questionable morals and expresses an ugly inner self set against a glamorous backdrop.
Sounds a lot like art imitating life to me.