› › ›

No Time To Die: Production Diary

1…14361437143914411442…2507

Comments

  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    TripAces wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    They were a lot more entertaining and more re-watchable,i must admit tbh.

    They felt like Bond films, and if i'm honest, had their share of moments that make me smile and think "Yes, this is Bond".

    Exactly..you could leave your brain at the door and watch Bond on his latest mission (yes MISSION Craig era EON !!).

    I'd love another straight forward mission plot. Don't think we'll get it before the next actor comes around, though.
    Maybe not even then! Though I do hope so.
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I think the balance is or was there. They tried to bring back Bond of old and it didnt work with Sp.
    I think it did, but even if it didn't, that doesn't mean it can't work, only that it didn't work this time, under these circumstances.

    ---

    Bond being a womanizer is an essential part of the Bond films.     He is character in a high-risk profession in which he may not live to see the next day, so it makes perfect sense that he takes every opportunity he can get to indulge in life's pleasures: hotels, good food, alcohol and relationships with the opposite sex. But more importantly, the womanizing is part of the Bondian fantasy that makes these films appealing. And there's nothing wrong with having plenty of relationships, as long as the other person is treated with respect and fairly, so it's a legitimate fantasy. Bond may have plenty of fleeting relationships, but in the films he generally doesn't treat his female companions in any degrading way. And he is not misogynistic, as Craig has claimed. In a few of occasions, he has behaved rudely toward women, but that's part of his profession, and not directly related to the fact they're women. Or is he a misandrist because he beats up the those men in the DAF PTS?

    But is Bond really a womanizer? I actually think that his behavior has always been a bit overblown, a sort of myth. There are only a few instances in which Bond attempts to seduce a female just for the hell of it. Most of his sexual conquests are job-related. And in many of those instances, it is the female who is the aggressor. In many others, such as the PTS in TLD and with Plenty O'Toole in DAF, Bond is the one preyed upon, not the other way around. In fact, it is this fantasy that is being played out: a man so attractive and charming that in many respects, he doesn't have to do much to have a woman falling all over him.

    Let's not forget, Bond is an agent and tasked to use whatever is necessary to get the job done. If this means using sex, then so be it -- Xena Onatopp and Fiona Volpe are perfect examples, from the other side of the equation.

    I think it’s more that he has no respect for women and sees them as objects that he can coerce or conquer through sex as a form of furthering his domination over them. Ironically this is what drives women to be with him.
  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 755
    TripAces wrote: »
    If we're talking about going back to the days of double-taking pigeons, theme music taken from other films, Tarzan yells, Beach Boys songs, invisible cars, x-ray glasses, and slide whistles during stunts...no thank you. The air bag in SP was bad enough.

    +1

  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited April 2018 Posts: 4,588
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    They were a lot more entertaining and more re-watchable,i must admit tbh.

    They felt like Bond films, and if i'm honest, had their share of moments that make me smile and think "Yes, this is Bond".

    Exactly..you could leave your brain at the door and watch Bond on his latest mission (yes MISSION Craig era EON !!).

    I'd love another straight forward mission plot. Don't think we'll get it before the next actor comes around, though.
    Maybe not even then! Though I do hope so.
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I think the balance is or was there. They tried to bring back Bond of old and it didnt work with Sp.
    I think it did, but even if it didn't, that doesn't mean it can't work, only that it didn't work this time, under these circumstances.

    ---

    Bond being a womanizer is an essential part of the Bond films.     He is character in a high-risk profession in which he may not live to see the next day, so it makes perfect sense that he takes every opportunity he can get to indulge in life's pleasures: hotels, good food, alcohol and relationships with the opposite sex. But more importantly, the womanizing is part of the Bondian fantasy that makes these films appealing. And there's nothing wrong with having plenty of relationships, as long as the other person is treated with respect and fairly, so it's a legitimate fantasy. Bond may have plenty of fleeting relationships, but in the films he generally doesn't treat his female companions in any degrading way. And he is not misogynistic, as Craig has claimed. In a few of occasions, he has behaved rudely toward women, but that's part of his profession, and not directly related to the fact they're women. Or is he a misandrist because he beats up the those men in the DAF PTS?

    But is Bond really a womanizer? I actually think that his behavior has always been a bit overblown, a sort of myth. There are only a few instances in which Bond attempts to seduce a female just for the hell of it. Most of his sexual conquests are job-related. And in many of those instances, it is the female who is the aggressor. In many others, such as the PTS in TLD and with Plenty O'Toole in DAF, Bond is the one preyed upon, not the other way around. In fact, it is this fantasy that is being played out: a man so attractive and charming that in many respects, he doesn't have to do much to have a woman falling all over him.

    Let's not forget, Bond is an agent and tasked to use whatever is necessary to get the job done. If this means using sex, then so be it -- Xena Onatopp and Fiona Volpe are perfect examples, from the other side of the equation.

    I think it’s more that he has no respect for women and sees them as objects that he can coerce or conquer through sex as a form of furthering his domination over them. Ironically this is what drives women to be with him.

    Which women? Those instances are actually few and far between, and for every instance in which he shows some disrespect (Patricia in TB is the single best example), there are others in which he is very bothered by women becoming collateral damage: Jill and Tilly both, Plenty (when she's thrown out the window and also found dead in the pool), Solange in CR, Fields in QoS, even Severine's death bothers him, despite the throwaway line (which, imho, is meant to throw dust in the air). In that case, DC does an effective job of showing how unnerved he is by Severine being used as target practice. He knows she is doomed and can do nothing about it. In SP, Bond offers care and advice to Lucia...there is no disrespect in that relationship, either.

    The women Bond disrespects the most are the ones he views as the enemy. And there is nothing wrong with that. Much has been made of the "rape" of Pussy Galore, but that is 100% nonsense. Pussy is about to become an accomplice in the planting and detonation of a nuclear device at Fort Knox. Bond's ability to use sex to "turn her" is far more tasteful than other methods he could have used.


  • Pierce2DanielPierce2Daniel
    Posts: 4,410
    Stay tuned to Baz's twitter:
    https://twitter.com/BazBam

    He usually drops big scoops on Thursday night leading into midnight every week. Mostly they are just scoops from the world of theatre. But occasionally, he does movie stuff.
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    TripAces wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    They were a lot more entertaining and more re-watchable,i must admit tbh.

    They felt like Bond films, and if i'm honest, had their share of moments that make me smile and think "Yes, this is Bond".

    Exactly..you could leave your brain at the door and watch Bond on his latest mission (yes MISSION Craig era EON !!).

    I'd love another straight forward mission plot. Don't think we'll get it before the next actor comes around, though.
    Maybe not even then! Though I do hope so.
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I think the balance is or was there. They tried to bring back Bond of old and it didnt work with Sp.
    I think it did, but even if it didn't, that doesn't mean it can't work, only that it didn't work this time, under these circumstances.

    ---

    Bond being a womanizer is an essential part of the Bond films.     He is character in a high-risk profession in which he may not live to see the next day, so it makes perfect sense that he takes every opportunity he can get to indulge in life's pleasures: hotels, good food, alcohol and relationships with the opposite sex. But more importantly, the womanizing is part of the Bondian fantasy that makes these films appealing. And there's nothing wrong with having plenty of relationships, as long as the other person is treated with respect and fairly, so it's a legitimate fantasy. Bond may have plenty of fleeting relationships, but in the films he generally doesn't treat his female companions in any degrading way. And he is not misogynistic, as Craig has claimed. In a few of occasions, he has behaved rudely toward women, but that's part of his profession, and not directly related to the fact they're women. Or is he a misandrist because he beats up the those men in the DAF PTS?

    But is Bond really a womanizer? I actually think that his behavior has always been a bit overblown, a sort of myth. There are only a few instances in which Bond attempts to seduce a female just for the hell of it. Most of his sexual conquests are job-related. And in many of those instances, it is the female who is the aggressor. In many others, such as the PTS in TLD and with Plenty O'Toole in DAF, Bond is the one preyed upon, not the other way around. In fact, it is this fantasy that is being played out: a man so attractive and charming that in many respects, he doesn't have to do much to have a woman falling all over him.

    Let's not forget, Bond is an agent and tasked to use whatever is necessary to get the job done. If this means using sex, then so be it -- Xena Onatopp and Fiona Volpe are perfect examples, from the other side of the equation.

    I think it’s more that he has no respect for women and sees them as objects that he can coerce or conquer through sex as a form of furthering his domination over them. Ironically this is what drives women to be with him.

    ....... even Severine's death bothers him.

    Much has been made of the "rape" of Pussy Galore, but that is 100% nonsense. Pussy is about to become an accomplice in the planting and detonation of a nuclear device at Fort Knox. Bond's ability to use sex to "turn her" is far more tasteful than other methods he could have used.


    ?????
  • Goldeneye0094Goldeneye0094 Conyers, GA
    Posts: 464
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    Stay tuned to Baz's twitter:
    https://twitter.com/BazBam

    He usually drops big scoops on Thursday night leading into midnight every week. Mostly they are just scoops from the world of theatre. But occasionally, he does movie stuff.

    What's the likely chance he will drop another bond 25 scoop tonight?
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Goldeneye0094 wrote: »
    Pierce2Daniel wrote: »
    Stay tuned to Baz's twitter:
    https://twitter.com/BazBam

    He usually drops big scoops on Thursday night leading into midnight every week. Mostly they are just scoops from the world of theatre. But occasionally, he does movie stuff.

    What's the likely chance he will drop another bond 25 scoop tonight?

    Slim. Too soon for another bit of news to drop.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Someone on the AJB forum brought up a potentially good point. Does anyone here think we could be looking at another pre-Skyfall predicament when production was suspended indefinitely back in 2010? I forgot exactly what the circumstances were that caused Skyfall to be delayed until 2012, but hopefully we’re not looking at a similar dilemma. Thoughts?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    It's always a possibility, but in this case I think may only occur in the case of an acquisition of MGM by a third party. In such a case there could be some turmoil as decisions are revisited. Actually if such a deal is currently in progress there may still be no delay, because B25 may be prepared to suit the acquirer from the outset.

    I don't see any other reason for a delay. If there is no acquisition they should want to move forward quickly and get the film in the theatres by the due date to start the money train rolling.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    TripAces wrote: »
    If we're talking about going back to the days of double-taking pigeons, theme music taken from other films, Tarzan yells, Beach Boys songs, invisible cars, x-ray glasses, and slide whistles during stunts...no thank you. The air bag in SP was bad enough.
    The air bag was by far the best about that whole action sequence.

  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    boldfinger wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    If we're talking about going back to the days of double-taking pigeons, theme music taken from other films, Tarzan yells, Beach Boys songs, invisible cars, x-ray glasses, and slide whistles during stunts...no thank you. The air bag in SP was bad enough.
    The air bag was by far the best about that whole action sequence.

    I agree,i did laugh out loud when it happened,thats definitely a 'Bond film' moment to me.

  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,185
    barryt007 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    If we're talking about going back to the days of double-taking pigeons, theme music taken from other films, Tarzan yells, Beach Boys songs, invisible cars, x-ray glasses, and slide whistles during stunts...no thank you. The air bag in SP was bad enough.
    The air bag was by far the best about that whole action sequence.

    I agree,i did laugh out loud when it happened,thats definitely a 'Bond film' moment to me.

    Me too, followed up by the smooth parachute landing in the middle of the street, very cool.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    00Agent wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    If we're talking about going back to the days of double-taking pigeons, theme music taken from other films, Tarzan yells, Beach Boys songs, invisible cars, x-ray glasses, and slide whistles during stunts...no thank you. The air bag in SP was bad enough.
    The air bag was by far the best about that whole action sequence.

    I agree,i did laugh out loud when it happened,thats definitely a 'Bond film' moment to me.
    Me too, followed up by the smooth parachute landing in the middle of the street, very cool.
    Make that three.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited April 2018 Posts: 8,438
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?

    Then again, hard to see why any distributor would get involved. Craig's antics are probably keeping everyone weary.

    495D485E00000578-5412361-_He_looks_different_Social_media_was_awash_with_eagle_eyed_fans_-a-54_1519138674085.jpg

    "I'd rather slash my wrists than star in another Bond film".
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?

    Then again, hard to see why any distributor would get involved. Craig's antics are probably keeping everyone weary.

    495D485E00000578-5412361-_He_looks_different_Social_media_was_awash_with_eagle_eyed_fans_-a-54_1519138674085.jpg

    "I'd rather slash my wrists than star in another Bond film".

    Have the carers not been over to take you to lunch yet?
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?

    Then again, hard to see why any distributor would get involved. Craig's antics are probably keeping everyone weary.

    495D485E00000578-5412361-_He_looks_different_Social_media_was_awash_with_eagle_eyed_fans_-a-54_1519138674085.jpg

    "I'd rather slash my wrists than star in another Bond film".
    Seriously mate?
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 7,532
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?

    Then again, hard to see why any distributor would get involved. Craig's antics are probably keeping everyone weary.

    495D485E00000578-5412361-_He_looks_different_Social_media_was_awash_with_eagle_eyed_fans_-a-54_1519138674085.jpg

    "I'd rather slash my wrists than star in another Bond film".

    I'd rather slash my wrists than read another inane post like this!
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?

    Then again, hard to see why any distributor would get involved. Craig's antics are probably keeping everyone weary.

    495D485E00000578-5412361-_He_looks_different_Social_media_was_awash_with_eagle_eyed_fans_-a-54_1519138674085.jpg

    "I'd rather slash my wrists than star in another Bond film".

    His antics notwithstanding, I think what might make them even more weary is a star whose head size changes every week.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    I think I'm having a stroke.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,584
    My only real beef with the Craig era is the running times of the films. Three that are too long and one too short.

    Spectre, especially, doesn't need to be that long. It takes up far
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?

    Then again, hard to see why any distributor would get involved. Craig's antics are probably keeping everyone weary.

    495D485E00000578-5412361-_He_looks_different_Social_media_was_awash_with_eagle_eyed_fans_-a-54_1519138674085.jpg

    "I'd rather slash my wrists than star in another Bond film".

    His antics notwithstanding, I think what might make them even more weary is a star whose head size changes every week.

    Oh boy! I know 95% of this thread is way off topic, but let's not drop to these levels guys?

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,438
    NicNac wrote: »
    My only real beef with the Craig era is the running times of the films. Three that are too long and one too short.

    Spectre, especially, doesn't need to be that long. It takes up far
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?

    Then again, hard to see why any distributor would get involved. Craig's antics are probably keeping everyone weary.

    495D485E00000578-5412361-_He_looks_different_Social_media_was_awash_with_eagle_eyed_fans_-a-54_1519138674085.jpg

    "I'd rather slash my wrists than star in another Bond film".

    His antics notwithstanding, I think what might make them even more weary is a star whose head size changes every week.

    Oh boy! I know 95% of this thread is way off topic, but let's not drop to these levels guys?

    I agree, NicNac. The run times really hamper the rewatch value of the latest films. I can pop in GE or TND any time and know I'll be in for a tight, fun romp regardless of said films faults. With CR, SF and SP, inspite of how artistically accomplished they may be, I can't be sure I'm going to enjoy the experience of sitting through them again.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited April 2018 Posts: 5,767
    I don´t mind the runtimes at all. I don´t fit to Mendes´ style of work, I don´t manage to adjust to it. I have no problem sitting through CR. I find SP boring way before the thought of runtime could come up. SF I wouldn´t call boring, but disengaging. Which is a shame because Craig never looked cooler than when he follows Tanner through those tunnels and enters the makeshift MI6.




    00Agent wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    If we're talking about going back to the days of double-taking pigeons, theme music taken from other films, Tarzan yells, Beach Boys songs, invisible cars, x-ray glasses, and slide whistles during stunts...no thank you. The air bag in SP was bad enough.
    The air bag was by far the best about that whole action sequence.

    I agree,i did laugh out loud when it happened,thats definitely a 'Bond film' moment to me.

    Me too, followed up by the smooth parachute landing in the middle of the street, very cool.
    That I found irritating, because it immediately reminded me of DAD, and I was firmly under the impression that the filmmakers wanted to get as far away as possible from that concept.

  • mattjoesmattjoes Pay more attention to your chef
    Posts: 7,057
    TripAces wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    They were a lot more entertaining and more re-watchable,i must admit tbh.

    They felt like Bond films, and if i'm honest, had their share of moments that make me smile and think "Yes, this is Bond".

    Exactly..you could leave your brain at the door and watch Bond on his latest mission (yes MISSION Craig era EON !!).

    I'd love another straight forward mission plot. Don't think we'll get it before the next actor comes around, though.
    Maybe not even then! Though I do hope so.
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I think the balance is or was there. They tried to bring back Bond of old and it didnt work with Sp.
    I think it did, but even if it didn't, that doesn't mean it can't work, only that it didn't work this time, under these circumstances.

    ---

    Bond being a womanizer is an essential part of the Bond films.     He is character in a high-risk profession in which he may not live to see the next day, so it makes perfect sense that he takes every opportunity he can get to indulge in life's pleasures: hotels, good food, alcohol and relationships with the opposite sex. But more importantly, the womanizing is part of the Bondian fantasy that makes these films appealing. And there's nothing wrong with having plenty of relationships, as long as the other person is treated with respect and fairly, so it's a legitimate fantasy. Bond may have plenty of fleeting relationships, but in the films he generally doesn't treat his female companions in any degrading way. And he is not misogynistic, as Craig has claimed. In a few of occasions, he has behaved rudely toward women, but that's part of his profession, and not directly related to the fact they're women. Or is he a misandrist because he beats up the those men in the DAF PTS?

    But is Bond really a womanizer? I actually think that his behavior has always been a bit overblown, a sort of myth. There are only a few instances in which Bond attempts to seduce a female just for the hell of it. Most of his sexual conquests are job-related. And in many of those instances, it is the female who is the aggressor. In many others, such as the PTS in TLD and with Plenty O'Toole in DAF, Bond is the one preyed upon, not the other way around. In fact, it is this fantasy that is being played out: a man so attractive and charming that in many respects, he doesn't have to do much to have a woman falling all over him.

    Let's not forget, Bond is an agent and tasked to use whatever is necessary to get the job done. If this means using sex, then so be it -- Xena Onatopp and Fiona Volpe are perfect examples, from the other side of the equation.
    This is a good distinction to make. I would agree he is a magnet for women, even though he is also an active womanizer in that he seduces the ladies and flirts with them. And while all that may happen in the context of a mission, those relationships certainly don't happen exclusively for job-related reasons, but often as a "bonus" for him. On the other hand, any ugly behavior toward women on his part does happen essentially because he is an agent and wants to get information out of them or coerce them into doing something for the sake of the mission.

    TripAces wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    They were a lot more entertaining and more re-watchable,i must admit tbh.

    They felt like Bond films, and if i'm honest, had their share of moments that make me smile and think "Yes, this is Bond".

    Exactly..you could leave your brain at the door and watch Bond on his latest mission (yes MISSION Craig era EON !!).

    I'd love another straight forward mission plot. Don't think we'll get it before the next actor comes around, though.
    Maybe not even then! Though I do hope so.
    Germanlady wrote: »
    I think the balance is or was there. They tried to bring back Bond of old and it didnt work with Sp.
    I think it did, but even if it didn't, that doesn't mean it can't work, only that it didn't work this time, under these circumstances.

    ---

    Bond being a womanizer is an essential part of the Bond films.     He is character in a high-risk profession in which he may not live to see the next day, so it makes perfect sense that he takes every opportunity he can get to indulge in life's pleasures: hotels, good food, alcohol and relationships with the opposite sex. But more importantly, the womanizing is part of the Bondian fantasy that makes these films appealing. And there's nothing wrong with having plenty of relationships, as long as the other person is treated with respect and fairly, so it's a legitimate fantasy. Bond may have plenty of fleeting relationships, but in the films he generally doesn't treat his female companions in any degrading way. And he is not misogynistic, as Craig has claimed. In a few of occasions, he has behaved rudely toward women, but that's part of his profession, and not directly related to the fact they're women. Or is he a misandrist because he beats up the those men in the DAF PTS?

    But is Bond really a womanizer? I actually think that his behavior has always been a bit overblown, a sort of myth. There are only a few instances in which Bond attempts to seduce a female just for the hell of it. Most of his sexual conquests are job-related. And in many of those instances, it is the female who is the aggressor. In many others, such as the PTS in TLD and with Plenty O'Toole in DAF, Bond is the one preyed upon, not the other way around. In fact, it is this fantasy that is being played out: a man so attractive and charming that in many respects, he doesn't have to do much to have a woman falling all over him.

    Let's not forget, Bond is an agent and tasked to use whatever is necessary to get the job done. If this means using sex, then so be it -- Xena Onatopp and Fiona Volpe are perfect examples, from the other side of the equation.

    I think it’s more that he has no respect for women and sees them as objects that he can coerce or conquer through sex as a form of furthering his domination over them. Ironically this is what drives women to be with him.

    Which women? Those instances are actually few and far between, and for every instance in which he shows some disrespect (Patricia in TB is the single best example), there are others in which he is very bothered by women becoming collateral damage: Jill and Tilly both, Plenty (when she's thrown out the window and also found dead in the pool), Solange in CR, Fields in QoS, even Severine's death bothers him, despite the throwaway line (which, imho, is meant to throw dust in the air). In that case, DC does an effective job of showing how unnerved he is by Severine being used as target practice. He knows she is doomed and can do nothing about it. In SP, Bond offers care and advice to Lucia...there is no disrespect in that relationship, either.

    The women Bond disrespects the most are the ones he views as the enemy. And there is nothing wrong with that. Much has been made of the "rape" of Pussy Galore, but that is 100% nonsense. Pussy is about to become an accomplice in the planting and detonation of a nuclear device at Fort Knox. Bond's ability to use sex to "turn her" is far more tasteful than other methods he could have used.
    Agreed. Bond is respectful of women, and let me add that the films themselves are respectful of them in that they generally portray flesh-and-blood women, not bimbos.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Pay more attention to your chef
    Posts: 7,057
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    00Agent wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    TripAces wrote: »
    If we're talking about going back to the days of double-taking pigeons, theme music taken from other films, Tarzan yells, Beach Boys songs, invisible cars, x-ray glasses, and slide whistles during stunts...no thank you. The air bag in SP was bad enough.
    The air bag was by far the best about that whole action sequence.

    I agree,i did laugh out loud when it happened,thats definitely a 'Bond film' moment to me.
    Me too, followed up by the smooth parachute landing in the middle of the street, very cool.
    Make that three.
    Four.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?
    Did you forget AGAIN to cut your pills in half, @Mendes4Lyfe ? Boyle's idea WAS subject to approval. Guess what? They approved it. That's why Hodge is writing the screenplay this very moment. The idea itself is not subject to approval anymore.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I wonder if his great idea is the same as I had a few years back. That Bond is the villain this time.
  • Goldeneye0094Goldeneye0094 Conyers, GA
    Posts: 464
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    I wonder if his great idea is the same as I had a few years back. That Bond is the villain this time.

    Oh god that would be one major plot twist that would make me throw my popcorn at the screen!
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    I wonder if his great idea is the same as I had a few years back. That Bond is the villain this time.
    Doing the Tony Armada, eh?
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?
    Did you forget AGAIN to cut your pills in half, @Mendes4Lyfe ? Boyle's idea WAS subject to approval. Guess what? They approved it. That's why Hodge is writing the screenplay this very moment. The idea itself is not subject to approval anymore.

    It might shake your youthful optimism, but there is just about nothing right now that is confirmed to be approved.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I remember many predictions that we would have news in the new year, and now it's April. All we've learned is that Boyle has an idea for a Bond film. Are we to assume that the distributor debacle is still holding things up, or are there creative differences, considering Boyle's idea was subject to approval?
    Did you forget AGAIN to cut your pills in half, @Mendes4Lyfe ? Boyle's idea WAS subject to approval. Guess what? They approved it. That's why Hodge is writing the screenplay this very moment. The idea itself is not subject to approval anymore.

    It might shake your youthful optimism, but there is just about nothing right now that is confirmed to be approved.
    The fat that John Hodge is writing the screenplay this very moment confirms that the idea itself was apporved.
Sign In or Register to comment.