End Of Bond As We Know Him

Well, it looks like the SJW Cultural Langoliers have destroyed another franchise.

This review of the newest Bond movie (which seems to be mostly based on the trailer with reasoned speculation) indicates that Bond is in retirement, but gets called back for One More Thing that only He can solve. Yet runs smack into the fact that his 007 designation is now assigned to another agent (a Black Woman, of course… now if only she’s a Lesbian they can have a 3-fer on SJW points…) and folks back at the Agency don’t remember him. OK…

Well, that’s OK. I have the original Bond on video. No need to waste my money to be “re-educated” at my own expense. Nice to have a clue what the plot is prior to wasting $10 to find out.

So sad. They could have just as easily had him return with his 007 (like pro ball players of merit, his number retired with him) and paired him up with a “Woman’s Woman” agent (perhaps numbered 0014 ;-) and had explosive sexual tension scenes between them.

Or just find another Smart young Scotsman who knows his way around a bar fight and make a traditional James Bond motif film.

When will the Hollywood / Media folks realize that we Deplorables do NOT go to movies to have our consciousness raised, be propagandized, have our attitudes adjusted, be manipulated, or otherwise treated like raw material to be formed and moulded. We go to forget about the world for a while and be entertained. Otherwise, we just won’t go. A 6 pack of beer, box of worms, and fishing hole costs about the same, lasts all day, does NOT offend me nor call me names (out loud or implicitly). In a pinch, you can skip the box of worms and fishing hole and need to clean fish and just spend an hour or two in the backyard at the BBQ…

See, that’s the thing about a “Finished Person” who is self directed and self aware. They see this kind of manipulative crap for what it is. Manipulative crap. Now 99% of the time for the last couple of decades it’s just been “Water off a Duck’s Back” and ignored. BUT things are different now.

There’s been a shift from the soft peddle to “shove down the throat” with Antifa clocking folks with bike locks in bags and with Twitter Mobs shouting down any traditional voices. That’s caused resentment. Resentment that NEVER goes away. So the time for “water off the back” is over. Gone. Now it’s time for “be the mirror” and for “DEFEND.” In that context the Finished Person who is self directed rejects the SJW Crap and DEFENDs against the attacks with gusto. They no longer just suck it up and wait for the wasted $10 to end.

See, that’s the thing about sensitization. Once sensitized to the assault, it can no longer be unseen or ignored.

Thus Starbucks posting lower revenue year over year while coffee houses around them show increases.

Thus the NFL having a drop off in acceptance.

Thus The Main Stream Media having layoffs by the thousands year after year after year.

Thus “Get Woke, Go Broke” in all its many manifestations.

Thus my not bothering to watch this particular Bond-ish film in theaters, nor bothering to buy it on DVD, nor renting it on Hulu / Netflix / whatever. I already know there’s no reason to watch it. You see, it isn’t Bond and it isn’t 007, it’s an SJW parody of that; and I don’t do SJW Crap Parodies.

Here’s another review with a few more details on the Wokeness / Death of the franchise:

Subscribe to feed


About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Arts, Movies & Media and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to End Of Bond As We Know Him

  1. Larry Ledwick says:

    I have a whole library of DVD’s that when I am in the mood, I can watch at will here at home. A few of them I won’t even watch any more because the actors in them have been such self righteous D**k heads that I can’t look past that to the character that they played any more.

    I now find my self buying DVD’s of older movies that I recall I enjoyed when they first came out many years ago, rather than the new movies.

    I go on Amazon prime and spend a half an hour looking for a movie I am remotely interested in watching and then log off and pick out one of my old DVD’s I have not watched in recent enough times that I can predict the dialogue.

    Mostly I just don’t bother. I have probably gone to a movie 5 times in the last 10 years in the theater, and the majority of those were on the invite of a friend, to a movie I did not really want to spend money to see but the social interaction trumped the shoddy movie presentation.

    The only solution to the problem is for the Hollywood production companies to keep losing a ton of money on every movie they make for about a decade, and they will eventually figure out that the only movies that make money are things like the movies Clint Eastwood directs that still provide non-political entertainment, like “Trouble with the Curve” etc..

    The only current movie I have interest in seeing is the Ford vs Ferrari movie story of the American victories at Le Mans in the 1960’s

  2. E.M.Smith says:

    What annoys me is that they could have had a Great movie just with a step away from the SJW crap and embrace the Franchise, but with a twist. Have the old 007 hauled back in (a bit tired as he looks) and have him paired up with 0014, a young strong black woman, who then seduces him (her on top of course, maybe after she judo throws him onto the bed ;-) ).

    The “woman’s woman” aspect along with the twist, while respecting the traditional male role; it would have worked.

    A “May / December” thing, mixed in with Traditional Bond and Miss Unexpected.

    Then have them go out as a TEAM and completely trounce the bad guys.

    That’s a movie I’d want to go see. Not preachy, yet “liberating” from the “barefoot in the kitchen” stereotype.

  3. p.g.sharrow says:

    I never cared for the “007 Bond” movies. Too much flash BANG ! noise and not enough spy subterfuge. sneak in and sneak out, quietly. The TV show”Secret Agent Man” Patrick McGowan was more my speed. Brains and training, not fancy toys and explosives to succeed in the mission…pg

  4. cdquarles says:

    I used to have every last one on DVD. Bond wasn’t a spy as much as a special ops kind of guy. I no longer have that collection nor have I seen any of them since, hmm, 2000, in a theater. Like Star Trek, I’ve written this off. Loved McGuiver, too; so seeing him in Stargate SG-1 (Richard Dean Andersen), helped me put up with some of the bad writing. That one ran a long time on the small screen. The sequels, not so much (yeah two of them).

  5. Nancy & John Hultquist says:

    Cat Ballou ?

    We go to forget about the world for a while and be entertained.

  6. E.M.Smith says:

    Oh God I like Cat Ballou ;-)

    Especially Lee Marvin on that horse that leaned up against the barn. (That’s my story and I’m sticking to it. That’s the ONLY reason I watch that movie over and over… and I’ve made sure the spouse knows it… )

  7. philjourdan says:

    I read today that P&G lost 5.2 billion last year – because of the Gillette division. And they (as well as we) know why Gillette lost.

    Hollywood revenue is falling this year, the latest terminator tanked, the latest Star Wars is the lowest of the main franchise, Ghostbusters lost a bundle.

    THey are blaming many things. Eventually they will run out of excuses. Like you, I will not see this stupid movie (let the frigging SJWs come up with their OWN franchises!).

    Some people are too stupid to learn,. That is what bankruptcy is for. Sears and GM have shown us that no company is too big to fail. And that includes Movie studios.

  8. Gary says:

    Hollywood isn’t after us old guys. Its after the young who are partially anaesthetized from years of propaganda and who recall hearing Dad mumble about the classic franchises. So the reboots don’t have to please the purists. Forget story, just put in lots of dizzying CGI action and push it out the door.

  9. Nancy & John Hultquist says:

    Regarding P&G:
    Looking at magazines and catalogs, I seem to be the only person in America with a clean face. I’m also an old white guy and I don’t buy Gillette nor most other P&G products.
    Seems a lot of the P&G loss was a “write-down” of $8 Billion for Gillette. I guess this does reduce earnings without affecting short-term capital. This is something I know very little about.
    Long run, who knows?
    It has taken Sears quite awhile to go from America’s big retailer to an afterthought.
    I suppose we own P&G shares in a mutual fund, so I should care.
    I don’t.

  10. Sera says:

    If yer looking for great movie reviews, try ‘The Critical Drinker’…

  11. Sera says:

    Oops- did not see the first one, just the second one.

    And Lee Marvin’s horse is classic!

  12. beththeserf says:

    The quintessential Bond. ‘I expect you to die, Mr Bond!’

  13. corsair red says:

    To be entertained: that is the only reason for a movie. Anything else is wasted on me or insults me. Another thing: when did Hollywood decide script writers were a waste of money? Nearly everything
    has all of the characters using f*** repeatedly as if it is the only word they know. I’m an adult. I’ve heard the language. But I don’t want to here it constantly. When a movie starts and the first two characters have said this fifteen times in one minute there is no reason to keep watching. I know there is no dialogue, just people swearing.

    @Larry Ledwick,
    Go see Ford vs Ferrari. I enjoyed very it much. Midway is also good.

  14. agimarc says:

    The Brits did the same thing to Dr Who. I never thought I’d miss Peter Capaldi. Cheers –

  15. Power Grab says:

    @ corsair red re: “Another thing: when did Hollywood decide script writers were a waste of money?”

    I keep thinking the writers switched from writing scripts for movies to “fake news” scripts if they wanted to keep earning a paycheck. Of course, the fake news gig is not as profitable as it used to be. They say that Adam Shiff was formerly some kind of script writer. Probably not a very good one, from the looks of things.

  16. YMMV says:

    The “No Time To Die” review clip above is good, although it has so many clips from older Bond movies, it’s hard to tell which clips are from the new one. It’s confusing, but not wrong. Here is one which is good at explaining the new official trailer and how it fits in to the continuing Bond story.

    The original Bond movies were aimed at (my guess) virgin teen-age boys. That’s a niche that may not exist anymore. Back then a boy may not have wanted to admit he was a virgin, now he may not want to admit he is straight. The new Bond-person in this movie won’t last. Dud. She (pronoun meaning woman) will be replaced by a trans-woman (Pronoun TBD) because trans is the new super-power fashion statement, and Bond movies are all about fashion.

    Speaking of female action heroes — why do they always have to out-macho the men?

  17. Larry Ledwick says:

    A female McGiver / Secret Agent Gal would probable be a huge hit.

  18. philjourdan says:

    @Gary – I realize the target demographic is the 18-30 crowd. But there is just one problem with that. They are the Millennials who are use to “free”. So they are not the ones paying. They pirate their music and their movies.

    Yes, the movies are geared to them. But there is no money in it, so they are going to lose.

  19. H.R. says:

    Not going to see it. I’ll wait for the book to come out.

  20. YMMV says:

    The book written by the team of screen writers? I think I’ll pass on that too.

    All I want to know about the new Bond movie is:
    Who is the bad guy? Russia, North Korea, other?
    Is there a digital readout of seconds remaining on the nuke? There is a nuke, right? There is always a nuke. Get with the script, you can’t change the plot! Just the names.
    Who is the Bond girl, but that is too sexist for woke Hollywood, so there isn’t one, right? That’s the franchise though, along with “Bond, James Bond”, “Shaken, not stirred”, and so on.

    Ricky Gervais had some choice words for Hollywood.

    Gervais concluded his scathing monologue by warning the celebrities not to make any political or “woke” statements when accepting their awards. “You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything,” he declared. “You know nothing about the real world. Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg.”


  21. philjourdan says:

    @YMMV – saw that. And why ouch? Facts do not have feelings. And he spoke the truth. About time.

  22. YMMV says:

    Facts do not have feelings, that’s right, but try telling Hollywood that. Hollywood (and the left), is all feelings, nothing but the feelings, and they must have felt that sting. Touché would work too.

    Going to see movies in a theater is trending down, like going to see movies in a drive-in theater.
    But they keep on making them. I don’t know if the percentage of good ones has changed or not; I think the action is in the mini-series now.

    Here is a list of about 30 movies. I have not seen any of them, so is this list any good?

  23. E.M.Smith says:

    The “ouch” is reflecting what the hollyweirds felt…


    Not seen any of them either, but the descriptions don’t get me interested.

    His point about Netflix is correct. After watching a dozen different Netflix Originals I realized they were very formulaic. Same basic plot profiles, different names and set dressing. I could likely write one to their style book now…. So we dropped Netfix and picked up the Disney package – for their library of Disney and Fox Classics. (Disney bought the Fox movie library).

    Caught the last half of “Three Days of the Condor” on Pluto last night and was reminded what really good movies are like….

  24. H.R. says:

    YMMV: “The book written by the team of screen writers? I think I’ll pass on that too.”

    [Best Foghorn Leghorn voice] “I say, I say, that was a joke, son. A joke!”

    To the best of my knowledge, no one ever makes a book out of a movie. It’s always the other way around.

    Which means I’ll not be seeing the movie nor reading any book based on that movie.
    I’m only going from memory here, but weren’t all of the early Bond movies based on one of Ian Fleming’s “Bond” books?

    Wait. I’ll go check.
    Okay, I’m back. Yup. They made a movie out of each of the “Bond” books, then when they ran out after Ian Fleming died, the Hollywood writers started making crap up.

  25. Larry Ledwick says:

    Speaking of Hollywood – the PC world just got turned up side down
    Ricky Gervais gave a searing opening speech to the Golden Globe Awards.

  26. philjourdan says:

    @YMMV – Touché – You are correct.

    As for the movies, there still are a few. But I have noticed they are trying to push the whole LGBTQ thing. Which is fine. If there are that many people who want to see trans its getting married and trying to start a family, or a hit broadway musical where they decide that cats become stupid and decide they are trans, or some poor schlob who realized after raising a family that he is really gay.

    But sadly, it does not appear there are enough to want to see them. So they are losing money. While the Indie movies that are about overcoming an obstacle, or surviving underwater for 15 minutes, etc. are made for low bucks and turn a profit. I especially liked “I Can Only Imagine”, but I know the wokes hate it because it is about religion.

    Disney is still above water due to their franchises, but those are running out, or have run out. And they are killing them in any event.

    A while back, EM was talking about which movies he likes, and the fact that most were made 30-50 years ago. Most of the ones I enjoy watching over and over again were made before 1974. There are a few since then (one I especially like is Secondhand Lions), but they account for less than a handful.

  27. philjourdan says:

    @HR – Re “To the best of my knowledge, no one ever makes a book out of a movie”

    2001 A Space Odyssey

  28. H.R. says:

    @phil – The best of your knowledge appears to be better then the best of my knowledge, to the best of my knowledge, unless you know better ;o)
    2001, eh? Who’d a thunk it? I read the book. Never saw the movie.

  29. cdquarles says:

    In this case, H.R., I recall seeing the movie long before reading the book and I do think the movie was made first. That was long ago, though. (I thought both were good.)

  30. rhoda klapp says:

    THe origin of 2001 was a short story called ‘The sentinel’ (IIRC). It was expanded into the movie then the book was based on that.

  31. philjourdan says:

    @HR – what Rhoda wrote. The problem was the movie was so obtuse, Arthur C. Clarke wrote the novel to give it more meaning (he was one of the “Big 3”). I did see the movie before I read the book, but then I had read the short story before I saw the movie, so was awed by the cinematography (I was 13 at the time).

    I still enjoy the movie. One of the few that I enjoy as much as the book. Even the Godfather, which was pretty close to the book (it left a lot out however), is not as good as the book.

Comments are closed.