It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
To be clear I'm not saying they will "time it" to happen then, just that there will be bonuses if it does.
I personally think if EON were to try and get the film released in 2025 they would have broken the silence and simply announced it by now, forget all the cloak and dagger stuff. The fact that Babs is still playing coy is an indication that things aren't as far along as we'd like, and in my opinion there's about a 50/50 chance that we get the film in 2026 or 2027, and less than 1% that it happens before then.
I see. I failed to read the irony and I apologize. ;-)
@Mendes4Lyfe
I agree with the spirit of your post. While sex is not yet forbidden in movies, there's an awkward tendency these days to "sterilize" it, to make it "safe" for all. We must be told that any ensuing sex between characters is absolutely consensual, bathing in mutual respect. We're not being shown too much action either (or else the film will receive a hard 'R'.) I particularly like your reference to Mary Whitehouse. I have said it before: I hate her. She couldn't handle sex and violence in movies, but I can. As an adult, I don't need to be told by an old hag what I can or cannot watch.
That said, I don't think that sex necessarily makes films better. For instance, I rather see a Bond film that omits sex scenes than a Bond film that throws one or two in just because it's part of some recipe. Bond making out with Madeleine on the train in SP feels very romantic to me; a sex scene with pelvic thrusts would shift the tone to something more - uhm - animalistic than the tone of that scene warrants (in my opinion). Also, Solange's exploration of Bond's body in CR is pretty sexy as it is; I certainly don't need to see coitus before I can feel satisfied as a Bond fan.
Then again, I have never thought of the Bond films as needing overt sex scenes anyway. A little playfulness here and there can do the trick. Fleming described some of Bond's horizontal actions in minute details, but the films have always been wise to show us the start and then quickly perform Bondus Interruptus. It's probably better that way. In any case, I don't think that putting Bond on a diet of one or two lovelies per film is necessarily an act of emasculating him. Plenty of passionate lovemaking is still implied, and that's good enough for me.
And yes, Paloma. I know, I know. We really needed much more of her in NTTD to brighten things up. Nomi and Paloma could have been merged into one awesomely funny character, preferably played by Ana, that stays just long enough in the film for her and Bond to "go down together" before Bond is reunited with Madeleine. It would have made sense too, as Bond had been living a pretty solitary life for so long. I almost pity the man's presumed chastity! Paloma could have gotten him "back on the horse" (as they say in Jersey Girl.) Related to that: one of the things that I find funny about DAD is that after several months in captivity, Bond doesn't miss the opportunity to bed Jinx. (I only wish Arnold didn't make that scene so bloody dramatic. 007 is merely having fun recommissioning some of his more private gadgets, old boy. No need to write music that sounds like this is a man on death row getting one final taste of the earthly pleasures.)
I agree dimi, inserted romance can be a problem sometimes too, like when random women would be horny for Roger Moore and basically start undressing the moment they met. On the whole I just don't like the idea that we're "achieving" something progressive and important by not showing characters having sex (or about to) anymore. It's almost as if young people have somehow ended up agreeing with the oldschool bible thumpers that there is some kind of "sin" involved with promiscuity that means it shouldn't be depicted.
This is a very good thing to mention every time folks suggest that they'll announce a new film or 007 actor on 'James Bond Day' every year- they really don't work by arbitrary dates! :)
Professionally, I interact with students in the age range of 16 - 18 on a daily basis. While some are still as liberal towards sex as you and I, I can safely say that a significant number of them have turned more prudish over the years. At the risk of being misunderstood, I'd say that they are overthinking sex. Obviously, it's important to talk things through before you go at it, certainly at that age, but it's a pretty normal thing otherwise. There are ways to take it too seriously. And the kind of "casual" sex that is/was commonly shown in many movies is sometimes treated as, indeed, sinful, or just "yucky".
If you must know, sex is occasionally brought up in chemistry class when discussing the mechanisms behind Viagra, the composition of lubricants, why certain common products are best avoided during intercourse (e.g. vaseline), and so on. I can tell by the astonished look on some 18-year-olds' faces that they are uncomfortable with the topic. I find that especially disconcerting since I'm providing neutral, fact-based, and altogether important bits of information that may help young people have safe sex and avoid common misconceptions about what is really going on down "there". I used to have every student's attention 15 years ago; now, some are clearly not particularly amused by the simple fact that sex is used as context in the first place.
This leads me to conclude that, indeed, some youngsters -- though I wouldn't say all of them, not at all, in fact -- are also uncomfortable with sex scenes in a PG film. I watched Basic Instinct when I was 13 and had no issues with the film. (Quite the opposite.) But I cannot imagine some of my students, even at the age of 18, sitting through the entire film.
I wouldn't say that's necessarily a problem (as long as they don't turn sex into a taboo, because that's just dangerous.) And I'm not sure that all filmmakers are really giving these things that much thought. But I cannot help feeling that movie sex has nevertheless become more "delicate" than it used to be (for better or worse.) Again, though, I must emphasize that I haven't felt a decline in sexual tension in the recent Bonds. I rather think that Craig's Bond has seen quite a bit of action under the sheets, though perhaps not quite as playfully and casually as, say, in the days of Moore or Brosnan.
..YOLT. 1967
TSWLM 1977 (10 years later)
..TND.. 1997 (20 years later)
...B27.. 2027 (30 years later)
So obvious.
Also looking forward to BXX in 2067. With the naval uniform. A craft that swallows other craft. A Q-vehicle to nickname Nellie on screen or off. The works.
You didn't say that, but you do seem to want to blame older men for the sexploitation in Bond films by characterizing them as horny old men, men experiencing a mid-life crisis, and old guys with sexual fantasies.
It wasn't very uncomfortable before, neither in my high school days, nor when I started teaching some years ago. Belgian students are commonly not too shy about sex, and certainly not when it is discussed objectively and without demanding any input from the teens themselves. Sex is not uncommon as a topic in biology class, English, religious studies and chemistry. Only recently has the attitude towards sex changed a bit, albeit among a minority of our students. Most of them are still cool with the topic and are eager to learn.
And there’s nothing wrong with being a horny old man. So long as you don’t take it far like Harvey Weinstein.
When I watch a Bond film I don't keep track of his number of conquests. I don't care. I never forget I am watching a film and it is fiction. I don't judge Bond on what little biographical information we are presented with about the women he sleeps with. Again, fiction, so I don't say, "He shouldn't have done that because....." Nor do I look at the films as encouraging bad behavior by young people of either sex. My only gripe about sex scenes in Bond films is when they are silly and played for laughs, which we got too much of during the RM era. I prefer a more serious Bond and mature sex.
What do you mean? Marc Forster was the only “young” director we’ve had so far, though I’d put a lot of other factors into why Bond isn’t depicted as someone sleeping with as many women as possible in QOS.
Another difference is Barbara Broccoli being a producer today. I doubt she’s interested in casting women based on wet t-shirt contests like her father was.
They’re continuing talks through the weekend, so it sounds like (🤞), no one is (figuratively) leaving the room until they get a deal done.
It goes to show, when backs are against the wall, people can always get a deal done. The question is why it had to get to months and months and months of strikes, the loss of millions of dollars and loss of jobs and loss of projects to get to this point (to finding compromise).
Brutal.
Right.
🤣🤣 And that's the second time she gets wet after the caviar factory scene!!
pushed on Eon, like Terri Hatcher before? There’s always been assertions that Eon was cold to her when the press attacked her.
Regardless, the producers are responsible for the content of the film. Wet t-shirts and otherwise.
Agreed.
How are we to interpret a "puritan James Bond"?
This is such an odd sub-conversation… does anyone actually think James Bond will be a “puritan”, or is this merely frustrations manifesting itself?
No, you’re not going to get the Swinging 60s Bond (culminating with Lazenby-Bond sleeping with everything that moved), nor will we get the 70s Bond , nor early to mid 80s geriatric Bond sleeping with women young enough to be his granddaughter… we will likely get something akin to TLD/Craig type romances, where the attraction and need for pleasure via sex is a mutual benefit for both parties (and no, I can’t see EoN throwing Bond another great love any time soon)…
She didn’t deserve her criticism. She did her job, and she was ok with it. The only people that I can see defending from the press would be Judi Dench and Daniel Craig, because it seems like they have always been their favorites. And it shows more than people realize.