›

The James Bond Debate Thread - 336 Craig looks positively younger in SP than he does in SF.

1…3435373940…190

Comments

  • VirageVirage
    edited March 2012 Posts: 1,856
    Luds wrote:
    No doubt about it. The standards have changed, but the R rating made it seem as it was a grossly over the top array of violence. Watching the film now, it's hard to understand why this was done.

    It was R?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? :O :O :O

    That is over reaction.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Agree! Big over reaction to the film when you look at the other film genre releases!
  • Dr_MetzDr_Metz
    edited March 2012 Posts: 401
    I honestly couldn't care less. Rather have an R rating on a Bond film than kids deciding things, like whether Jaws should survive or not. At least we got the uncut edition of LTK on DVD.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,172
    Actually, I do care. An R rating mean a tremendous loss of money in certain parts of the world. Parents are sometimes too easily upset by the prospect of some nudity or violence and thus will keep the young ones on a tight leash. Yet kids and their desire to go to the theatre for spectacle, bring their friends, consume candy, soft drinks and crisps, and come back for seconds if they liked it the first time, can contribute significantly to the final grosses of a film. Then there's also the toy / game / merchandising market, where, again, kids are often the driving force behind profitable product output. Remember, it was the negative response of kids to DeVitto's scary Penguin that made McDonalds withdraw their Batman Returns themed funnies. Batman Forever adjusted the balance by toning down the violence and creating more potential for the kids' market, but now we're stuck with a less pleasing film (IMO that is). In the end, it's all about the money. Now, granted, it's not my money. In theory I couldn't care less what profit a film brings home, unless of course when it turns out being a deciding factor in whether or not there will be a next film any time soon. Had LTK been more successful, perhaps a great third Dalton film would have seen the light of day in the early 90s - and boy, would I have loved a third (and fourth ... and fifth) Dalton Bond. Now, I'm not saying that the R rating is the key reason why UA put Bond on ice for half a decade - other well documented reasons exist. But, who knows, it did contribute *somewhat*.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    LTK was by most means a lesser Bondmovie, more like a generic actioner with the problem that the generic action actors like Willis, Schwarzenegger, Stallone and such did it much better.
    For me LTK is more a failed Miami Vice episode, it lacked Crockett & Tubbs and most importantly style & class.

    The fact that there is a rating is good, you do not want to have your kids go to whatever movie they fancy since that lies on parental responsibility. How they pick up on that is their choice, even if Occasionaly even I consider some parents idiots. I remember how a father wanted to take his 7 year old to the latest Conan the Barbarian. He did not get into the cinema and was mighty angry and told eveybody that he would watch it with his kid on bluray. I saw that movie and find it containing stuff I would not like my 7 year old to look at.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,172
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 048</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>The fact that many Bond films objectify women is actually a good quality.</b></font>
  • VolanteVolante
    Posts: 774
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 048</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>The fact that many Bond films objectify women is actually a good quality.</b></font>

    I agree. Just because I watch casual sexism in a film, doesn't mean I'm a sexist myself. It's nice to watch something slightly politically incorrect, particularly when everything else is so PC.

    And it's not like Bond is over the top in it's objectification of women.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited March 2012 Posts: 12,480
    objectification ... how do I weigh in here? Note: I am female.

    I like Bond movies, all of them in general.
    I guess I do not have a problem with the way it has been done (any "objectification" of women) so far.

    hmmm ...objectification ... I suppose that is one of the main reasons why I like Jason Statham movies. ;) (objectification of a male ...)
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited March 2012 Posts: 24,172
    4EverBonded wrote:
    objectification ... how do I weigh in here? Note: I am female.

    I like Bond movies, all of them in general.
    I guess I do not have a problem with the way it has been done (any "objectification" of women) so far.

    hmmm ...objectification ... I suppose that is one of the main reasons why I like Jason Statham movies. ;) (objectification of a male ...)

    I love this! B-) Finally, a woman who can admit to objectifying men as much as men tend to *sometimes* objectify women. ;-) @4EverBonded, you're a lady for whom I take a deep bow!

    As for the thesis, I agree. Personally, I think the objectification of women in the Bonds is:
    * fairly harmless as long as one doesn't extrapolate it into his everyday life;
    * part of the fun of it all, especially nowadays as we're trying hard to kick the PC world in its family jewels and beg our society to please, for once, relax;
    * in fact required as the opposite, women with too much 'content', usually don't work quite as well in the Bonds, fail to be convincing and in fact waste valuable screentime in which Bond can be Bond: sexual tyrannosaur and womaniser.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited March 2012 Posts: 28,694
    Ahhh...
    http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x65/ZB2266/Shirley_Eaton_binoc-z.jpg
    http://images.tuxboard.com/d/16368-1/Shirley+Eaton+James+Bond+Girl.jpg
    http://www.james-bond.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/ursula-andress-james-bond-dr-no.jpg
    http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/j/Claudine Auger.jpg
    http://www.covetshop.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Pussy_and_her_Crew.jpg

    I wholeheartedly agree.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,172
    Appreciated, OBrady. Such pictures never fail to entertain me. However, let's not forget the copyright issue... ;-)
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    I find that the 007 celibrates the diverse women and their beauty, More often than not they are smart selfsuffecient ladies that do know wnat they want.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    SaintMark wrote:
    I find that the 007 celibrates the diverse women and their beauty, More often than not they are smart selfsuffecient ladies that do know wnat they want.
    Yes, a celebration of women being Bond's equal and all that yadda yadda. Not like that's ever the case.

    ;)
  • Baltimore_007Baltimore_007
    Posts: 5,634
    Times change, themes today are chalk and cheese from the early 1960s in all walks of life and (Bond) Objectification for women is no different, what may have seemed appropriate or innocent back in the day particularly with the Connery releases at his most Bond like may be viewed at from a different perspective from todays angle

    I don't watch Bond films primarily for 'any skirt' or nice looking ladies even, I seek action, suspense and a tangible plot line above all else, although the girls do play a part of course and will always be associated with Bond but I like to keep them at a minimum if possible. We've seen so many of them from the start, some have taken care of themselves, some have been easy prey you could say, and some fall somewhere in between, but bottom line is, and after some careful consideration, I say can't really agree with last thesis, although there was no real harm done and it's only in the earlier releases that sexual objectification with Bond really came to the fore and died down in subsequent releases for the most part, so all told there's no real harm done
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    I think the "objectification of women" is part of the appeal, just like playboy, beauty pageants etc
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,172
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 049</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Mister Kiss Kiss Bang Bang would have been a better title song than Thunderball.</b></font>
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Disagree. Although it is a reasonable song. It's no match for the vocal power of Tom Jones!
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    edited March 2012 Posts: 1,497
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 048</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>The fact that many Bond films objectify women is actually a good quality.</b></font>

    Let's face it, it's part of the appeal and iconography of Bond: Honey emerges out of the ocean, Tatiana with that S-n-M collar necklet, Jill Masterson covered in gold...moving forward to today: Solange riding a horse across a beach...Bond is accepted as fantasy and fiction. I wouldn't say objectifying women is necessarily a good thing, but it is what makes Bond what it is. Exploiting women is something else, and I don't think the films ever did that.
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 049</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Mister Kiss Kiss Bang Bang would have been a better title song than Thunderball.</b></font>

    Definitely no...MKKBB is a really goofy song title, that would have brought Bond into self-parody way to prematurely.

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,715
    DarthDimi wrote:
    <font color=tomato size=4><b>THESIS 049</b></font>

    <font color=blue size=7><b>Mister Kiss Kiss Bang Bang would have been a better title song than Thunderball.</b></font>

    No.
  • 6of16of1
    Posts: 63
    Surely not. Thunderball is a classic in a way KKBB never was. And not because the latter wasn't a title song.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,287
    Agree. The song "Thunderball" is a funereal, waterlogged dirge, like the film itself after Fiona Volpe is dispatched.
  • VirageVirage
    Posts: 1,856
    No, Thunderball suites the film perfectly.
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497
    echo wrote:
    Agree. The song "Thunderball" is a funereal, waterlogged dirge, like the film itself after Fiona Volpe is dispatched.

    This is my position on the film. Killing off Fiona so early was the biggest mistake of the film. Domino cannot carry the weight.

  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    Either one works for me. But niether is one of my favorite Bond songs.
  • bondbat007bondbat007
    Posts: 1,407
    It's not that MKKBB is a bad song, it's just that Thunderball is better. I could live with either one but because it doesn't really matter in my book I'll have to disagree
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Not the best song and not as good as Thunderball but still very good.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    No, no, no. TB is great, and Tom belts it beautifully to this day.
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497
    MKKBB to it's credit isn't too bad. It's still classic Barry with Shirley Bassey. But "Thunderball" by comparison is a much stronger song.

    <url>
  • JBFan626JBFan626
    Posts: 1,497
    And then there's this version:

    <url>
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    NO, Tom is the man.
Sign In or Register to comment.