According to a rumour from The Daily Mail, the newest Bond movie has cast Lashana Lynch as 007. Though nothing has been confirmed, given that Daniel Craig is soon ending his tenure it’s possible that Lynch will be replacing him in this movie. And since Craig’s Bond has centred around death and heartbreak, as evidenced by Casino Royale and Skyfall ending bittersweetly, it’s not a stretch to suggest that his character could potentially die. Like many long-running properties, this could be yet another passing of the torch. And I, for one, am game!
Unfortunately, not everyone agrees. Ever since the announcement, there’s been a predictable, racist backlash on the internet. It shouldn’t be surprising, it’s the internet, but it’s tiring to listen to insecure men whine about their insecurities. And since responding to hot-button topics seems to net me strong viewership, I’m discussing it! Because screw my sanity!
I won’t deny that nerds can be overly-obnoxious whiners when it comes to change. If you want proof, read how they responded to Tifa’s redesign in the remake of Final Fantasy 7. But James Bond’s unusual because his franchise was built on colonialist misogyny. Not only would Bond be a Me Too predator if he were real, but he’d also be everything wrong with white imperialism. Everything about him, including how he demeans colleagues, screams it. So his personality remaining constant, despite casting changes since the 60’s, indicates how outdated he is.
I’d be fine with a black woman taking over the 007 role. For one, it’d be different. And two, it’d change the franchise in a slightly positive way. Granted, I doubt having a black, female Bond doing the same stuff a white, male Bond does would suddenly excuse bad behaviour. But it’d at least be a step in the right direction.
Personally, the healthiest decision is retiring the character. I wrote a piece last year discussing why James Bond’s a terrible role model, and I still hold that now. Considering the damage he’s done since 1962, I doubt it’s good to have a backward, archaic stereotype still exist. But since he’s a huge money-maker for MGM, and since he’s incredibly-popular, I guess revamping his character’s more realistic. Even if that means pissing off nerds who think non-cis white males in entertainment is “making a political statement”.
One of the big conversations right now is the box-office of The Avengers: Endgame. The film has almost neared $3 billion in worldwide sales, making it the second-highest grossing movie ever. That’s pretty impressive, but people are also praying for it to beat Avatar and become the “king of movies”, or some nonsense like that. I don’t get it. I really don’t.
I know that the world has an irrational hate-boner for Avatar, so I’ll focus on why this pissing match is ridiculous. Because it is, especially since Disney owns both properties. By having this contest, you’re praising Disney to slight Disney. Does that really make sense?
Disney has many problems. It’s a corporate entity that’s absorbing everything and laying off grunt workers. Much of its staff get paid non-liveable wages. It has a stranglehold on copyright law because of Mickey Mouse. And it hides all of that under a veil of obnoxious, performative wokeness. This doesn’t mean that I don’t like Disney’s output, I enjoy much of it, but the above’s still true.
By giving money to Disney under the guise of one movie beating another, you’re not fixing those problems. Instead, you’re giving money to a corporation that isn’t addressing any of them. Does this mean you can’t see The Avengers: Endgame a third time in theatres? No! But don’t go making this a game of “let’s beat Avatar”, not when Disney owns it too.
Besides, I doubt Disney or James Cameron really care that The Avengers: Endgame is selling like hotcakes. Cameron’s already making 3 sequels to Avatar, possibly more if the cards align. Knowing his track-record, he’ll probably out-gross The Avengers: Endgame and make everyone start the war all-over. And then Marvel will out-gross him with their next Avengers movie. And then Cameron will-you see what I’m getting at?
Above all, it’s Disney that benefits most from this. You can enjoy their output, but don’t make this into a war. Be grateful the movie entertained you. Be grateful that it was worth the overpriced ticket cost, and be grateful that you had 3 hours of fun. Most of all, be grateful you have time to enjoy these movies before we’re all screwed by climate change.
Scarlett Johansson’s been digging a hole lately, right? First, she played Major Kusanagi in the live-action adaptation of Ghost in the Shell. Then she was cast as a trans individual in an upcoming biopic, a role she backed out of after pressure. Now she’s come out and-wait, what? SHE SAID WHAT?!
In a recent interview, Johansson lamented about “PC culture” in Hollywood, stating that she, and I quote, “be allowed to play any person, or any tree, or any animal” if her job requires it. She later stated that that was taken out of context, but even saying that jokingly is a head-scratcher. What does that even mean? What planet am I on? Who are you people, and can I really trust you?
I’d rather not be “one of those people”. I don’t want to shamelessly trash Johansson’s acting because of that statement, true or not. It’s the coward’s way out, and she deserves better. But I’m unhappy that an A-list celebrity would say something so tone-deaf in response to legitimate criticism.
It doesn’t help that trans talent routinely gets the raw deal when it comes to casting. Without going into too much detail, trans men and women are routinely treated as jokes, victims, or both. Whenever their stories are told, it’s usually with cis actors and actresses, culminating in a loss of work. This further leads to stereotypes that incite violence and discrimination, which, in turn, leads to deaths. It’s sad, scary and cyclical.
By making the above statement, Johansson’s made it clear that she doesn’t care about trans people. She’s made it clear that she values money more than what’s right, even at the expense of her image. But, most-importantly, she’s made it clear that she’s transphobic. And that saddens me.
I wish she had more courtesy than that. I really do. But she doesn’t, and it’s frustrating. The trans community has enough on their plate without her nonsense as is. And given how she’s been criticized for having incredibly-limited range, it’s also not helping her case.
Yes, acting’s all about imitation. I get that. But life’s messy and imperfect, too. Until minorities have the same acting opportunities as the default, playing a minority is a form of theft. It’s legal, but it’s theft. And that’s that not okay.
That about it does for now. I’ll see you all next time.
No comments:
Post a Comment