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
These change in attitudes really are laughable sometimes. The James Bond Encyclopedia I have referrs to him as being the film's "greatest asset".
Ofcourse they will. They won't say he sucks now will they? What kind of promotional material is that. But us fans know better. Brosnan's acting has improved in recent years but at the time he was extreamly limited. Any time he tried to "act" (TWINE) he came off as laughable.
No but they didn't need to say he was the films "greatest asset" either. From what I remember most people didn't have a big issue with him - then.
Do "us fans" really know better? Fans will follow trends. I bet you if this forum had existed in the 90s most people would be praising him.
I actually thought he was pretty good in TWINE (for the most part). I recall Haphazard saying he thought it was Brozza's best performance.
I'll agree though that Brozza wasn't (or isn't) a great actor but he has got better with age. I thought he was FAR worse in a film like Taffin. Thank god he wasnt bond in 1986.
<font color=blue size=7> <b>Bond beating women back in the '60s / '70s should not be considered offensive.</b></font>
After the haitus everyone was kissing Brosnan's a$$. Time has been very telling with Brosnan. People are starting to realise in retrospective that he was nothing special.
And personally I never liked him as Bond. I often describe him as a poor man's Roger Moore and a homeless man's Sean Connery.
That's a good thing too. I wouldn't want to see Bond put on a hockey mask, yield a machete and chase some half naked bimbo through the woods.
Actually, now that I'm thinking about it, I might find it interesting for just this once perhaps. ;-)
Having said that, I LOVE Sean Bean and would have dearly liked to have seen him as Bond. He would be a great Bond. Oh yes!
The films are a reflection of society at that time in history ... but certain things are always to me offensive. Sometimes physical abuse is offensive. Racist remarks are offensive. I do not excuse them to the point where I say they are OK or do not matter. I don't get hung up on this though, either.
The question of the debate though is should Bond beating women in the 60's/70's be considered offensive? Yes. But that doesn't diminish the quality of the films as a whole. Likewise, just because they are classics to me and you, doesn't excuse them from moral ethics. We can't change them, but that doesn't mean the scenes still aren't offensive.
They were sometimes quite uncomfortable to watch but so was Fleming's rant about women working in the field (CR).
I'm not saying scenes like that should be repeated today. It just wouldn't work regardless of what some of us hardcore fans might say. We've moved on from that. Hitting women isn't a good or glamorous thing.
I could get into an argument about women hitting men (*cough*Brosnan*cough*) and men hitting women but I'm not going to.
A similar example actually happened yesterday. I was watching a really old Hitchcock movie from the 1920s where the N-word was openly used towards a black man. Initially I was quite taken aback but then I just brushed it off an accepted it. Can't do much about it so why worry.
Agreed. The worst Bond did to a woman was slap them in the face or bottom. Note that Bond never hit a woman a second time. There were many instances in other non-Bond films after TMWTGG was released that a woman was treated far worse by a man.
Ehh, that's not exactly true. When Bond hit them, he had a reason. when he hit Andrea Anders in TMWTGG it was for a reason, he need information, he got it fast. Again, in DAF; he choked Marie (with her bra) because he needed Blofeld's location. Simple as that. Also, It's not like he went around in the films hitting women for 2 hours. He didn't step into Universal Exports and hit Moneypenny across the mouth. I don't get why this is a big issue with some.
Tatiana actually shot Klebb. But anyways, I like your point. Bond didn't slap Tatiana, Tracy, Tiffany or Andrea without reason or randomly slap Moneypenny, although he did threaten to spank her once. The only time anyone could really come down on Bond was when he slapped Dink's butt in GF.
We should note other instances of someone other than Bond hitting woman. Draco knocking out Tracy, Kananga back handing Solitaire, Kristatos slapping Bibi and Gobinda KOing Octopussy come to mind. These four instances were, shall we say, less than honorable.
Oh god, that's right isn't it? Stupid mistake on my part.
And isn't it a little sexist anyway to preach that women should be completely off limits? ;)
Tatiana, Tiffany, and Andrea bother me less, maybe because it seems more motivated by the plot (especially Tatiana). Hitting Tracy is the most off-putting because she turns out to be so important to Bond later on.
Precisely. Well said my friend. What I fine offensive is more the comments below, which suggest that it is okay for Bond to hit women if they provide some information to him. Bond has other resources to get information, namely his charm. I understand he needs to come across as firm and no-nonsense, as in the scenes with Tatiana and Tiffany, but there are other means of intimidation. And why should Tracy be off limits from being hit because of this logic? She's not a disposable Bond girl, therefore she shouldn't be hit? Please.
In regards to the scene with Andrea in Golden Gun, that scene is so unpleasant to watch. Moore himself said he was uncomfortable doing that scene, but the director wanted him to do it that way so that his Bond came across as tough. You know that Moore-Bond could have easily seduced Andrea into falling in love with him and getting the info he needed. It's just crass.
To be honest I thought that scene gave Sir Rog's bond more dynamic than the usual charm he used during the rest of his tenure. I'm not saying that they needed to go over board with it or anything, just that it was nice to see something new.
<font color=blue size=7> <b>Three countdown climaxes in three consecutive films (OP, AVTAK, TLD) was lazy.</b></font>
The countdowns themselves are far better than the one in Goldfinger in my opinion.
Lazy, well, it goes a way to prove the lack of ideas in the '80's (Glen?) but it was done well, and that is what matters.
Countdowns, while perhaps cliche to a degree, at least are effective tension building devices. So I think they work in the context of each of these individual plots.