No need for apology. When trying to be clever (and it's a futile attempt, for sure…) on AV Club, I often wind up talking around an issue even more than I usually do - which is a lot.

Criticising something is not the same as demanding it be eradicated from existence.

I haven't watched a great many of the "classic" Bond films but, indeed, I have assumed that the majority of these characters Bond ended up with had no scenes showcasing immense agency in the face of authority. I certainly don't recall seeing it in those classic Bond films I have seen.

Well, it is!

Please state your point plainly then if it isn't that the character, by being a side character, isn't allowed to have agency.

You're the one who said she was the sexual reward - not I.

That's a very dismissive perspective to put forward when discussing such a serious topic. That you would think I am somehow "up Vaughn's ass" to not side with people I feel are plainly taking the wrong route of criticizing this element of the film (a route which I feel, ironically, actually reenforces the notion that…

…Well, I can but not in this context, no. And I know you said "ending" which is why I pointed out where the events I was describing took place. Just to emphasize how problematic and apparent this is in the world of the Bond films even if it may not take place in the narrative at the same point they were attempting to…

Taking a character who is, in movie shorthand, a strong and principled character and suddenly turning her into a sexual reward for the hero was jarring. And that is officially as deep as I want to get into this movie.

Using Vaughn's logic, you just think you ran over a cat but he actually saved it while you were busy being upset.

It's probably somewhere along the same line of reasoning that allows people to think that saying, "It's offensive." inherently means something.

*confused face*

*points at the article*

Thanks, Obama!

I think his point was that it's treated as perfunctory in the Bond films (like the women are just sex props there to show up and get Bond off) while in his film the woman has the agency and initiates the sex being that "bold" and "extreme." While Eggsy just wanted a kiss or the like.

Of course you would say that incredibly PC thing. But I'm opposed to that. And let me tell you why…

But it being misogynistic and offensive doesn't mean it should be excluded from the film unless there is some other prevailing thought regarding the inclusion of elements in film and what that is meant to represent/mean/matter/etc. to the rest of the culture.

It was made for American audiences who will know exactly who that is meant to be while they won't have any clue about anyone else.

I got what was going on but only to a degree. I wish it would have been established a bit better so I could have been like, "Oh, it's just complete mayhem!" rather than, "Wait, is he doing this out of some misguided notion of self-defense or…is it getting to him too? It's got to be getting to him, too, right?…

Maybe not the ending but smack in the middle of Skyfall was Bond slipping into the shower behind a woman who just moments earlier revealed to him that she was a victim of sex trafficking.