This one gets it

Alberts daughter

Ripley was written as a man and then cast as a woman. Wonder Woman traditionally has the moral complexity of a goldfish and is essentially a rehash of old legends displaced in time- with her hook being the novelty, and the hook of the original legend being the novelty of a “female warrior tribe” at the time it was made. Lara Croft as well as WW and arguably Ripley were not invented as interesting female characters. They were evolved into interesting female characters and only largely so as society evolved as well. What I’m saying is not that I disagree that one shouldn’t make natural female characters, or that the characters named didn’t become or couldn’t be viewed as good examples of strong, interesting characters- I’m just saying that in the examples given are precedent for not only male characters who were turned female and well received for it, but a character with the complexity of Superman (staunch moral compass, near invincibility, etc.) and a character made popular by boobs.

Atomic blonde is a good spy thriller with a female protagonist, though it’s much closer to John Wick than James Bond

Bad movies are bad movies. The Rock has had some really good roles, and he’s done some really crap stuff. Crystal Skull would have been bad without the Indiana Jones name, without the characters, without the cast and crew and legendary directors. Lucas made cultural pillars with films like American Graffiti and The original trilogy. But he also made episodes 1-3 and other flops. Bad movies aren’t gender issues. They’re bad movies. You could make an amazing female spy movie, or a terrible one. You can make the Nolan verse or the Keaton bat verse, bat man TAS, or you can make BVS.... each has its own take on the world and characters and style but uses the same material, and each is very different in delivery and reception. The gender isn’t important compared to the writing, acting, directing, and studio support.

That fits the story tho. Regenerations not having a real sex restrictions and all

A lot of people were upset about it. I admit I had my doubts.

I predicted this 6 years ago.

https://youtu.be/tp_Fw5oDMao

Laura Croft as a man has already been done. Indiana Jones, Romancing the Stone, the serials Indy was inspired by, the librarian... You could also argue other properties. I mean, in many ways she’s Batman without the theme and pulled from one city into the wide world. Plop her sprite into Turok or Far Cry and anyone who hadn’t played before wouldn’t know it wasn’t a regular ranchise title. Does Fem Shep vs he shep change the story of Mass Effect so much? Samus as a male space bounty hunter... would it be so different? If Jason was a giant woman in a hockey mask, if Tom Cruise and Emily blunt switched roles in Edge of Tomorrow? There are nuances of social gender roles one can use in writing to shape emotional responses, but largely gender isn’t so important to the story usually- but inclusion is important to many people.

Yesss Mass Effect and Dragon Age are in my opinion one of the best series of games in terms of gender equality because apart from some romance options, gender doesn't change jack shit. The writing of the games is superb and whether you chose a female or male Shepard doesn't matter at all, you're just a really badass human saving the galaxy from the Reapers. That's what's important -- good writing, a good story and lore. Not whether the protagonist has this or that between their legs. But in my experience a lot of writers (male AND female) have trouble with writing female characters because they either take into account gender roles and make her a damsel in distress bimbo or try to work against gender roles and make her a Mary Sue. That's why it's pretty rare to find a realistic female character as opposed to male characters in my opinion. It's just my personal experience though, maybe yours is totally different.

I would agree, a lot of writers seem to have trouble finding a voice for female characters. They seem to have trouble writing them “honestly” in a way where they are comeplete people, or in a way which their personalities and traits are aligned to other characters in the story. But that’s writing skill and not inherent to the gender as much as it is to the issues and perceptions surrounding it. In essence- if you can remove the pronouns or swap the pronouns and still have a good story, then it shouldn’t really effect wether the story is good or not. Obviously, certain nuances change with pronouns, and stories that rely on certain gender themes, dynamics, or issues this doesn’t apply. The “hook” of To Wong Fu is lost if we have women dressing up as women. Ms. Congeniality may still be good, but becomes more complex a story if we replace the female lead with a male lead trying to go undercover in a female beauty pagent- so hopefully no one takes my words as to say there is no difference.

James Bond is the characters real name. The change in actors isn't part of the canon storyline. They are all the same guy. The code name is 007. Changing the gender of the character for the sake of changing it is just stupid which is what that would be.

Yeah idk why people are downvoting me, I said I am against changing characters for the sake of being inclusive only. But it's just weird that Bond has been portrayed by so many different actors (and in not too long a span either, I get why they'd change them for being too old but when Brosnan was replaced by Craig he wasn't that old) and we still pretend it's one guy.

doctor who is a completely different fish to fry. The doctor's regenerations have never had rules for sex/race/etc. It's completely in keeping with previous canon that the doctor could regenerate female. Every doctor changes personality, physical state, etc completely. Making the doctor a woman is no bigger a difference than between capaldi and tennant.