Sebastian Faulks ridicules 'distasteful' Bond film 'Skyfall'

1235710

Comments

  • Posts: 3,333
    And I'd love to hear your suggestions for how Bond was meant to protect Severine at that point when it was pretty clear he had no chance in saving her, being outnumbered.
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 117
    Ludovico wrote:
    It's hard to be a Bond fan and a feminist at the same time and I can't ignore the problematic stuff envolving Severine in SF. I can't say I didn't like her (God, that beautiful piece from SF score still manages to make me cry), but Severine compared to Camille in QoS is a big backpedal. They don't need to be sexualized! I hope they will bring us girls with more attitude in the next films because the old damsel in distress archetipe is so boring and so last century. But still, I have seen worse, tbh.

    Btw, yes, it's just a movie, but you know... It's frustrating when they be could exploring different types of women. I care about this franchise and I want to be able to say that I'm proud of everything they do.

    But damsel in distress are a classic archetypes and Fleming used them very well. Why can't they show up in Bond movies? If done right of course. Just like femmes fatales, they have their place in fiction. Superwomen in contemporary fiction are often nothing more than male fantasies anyway, more mensuration with guns (or knives, or swords) than proper characters.

    Sure! I'm not saying they shouldn't have space on the franchise anymore. And that's exactly my point. If they're not damsels in distress they're the femme fatales. How about actually use more of their time and make something different. It's 2013, come on.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited August 2013 Posts: 11,139
    bondsum wrote:

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?

    Do me a favour. It's not that I don't get it as you put it. I understand that the film chose to convey an aspect of the story in a way that you and some others simply don't like. As for keeping things Fleming, yeah, that's not really going to fly. These are films inspired by the spirit of Fleming but they're in no way and have not always been "true" to how Fleming may or may not have carved things out and that's not even my argument or point I was debating. As far as I'm concerned the only negative thing i have to say about the Severine portion of the film is that her screen time was insufficient. The shower/sex scene is not only typical of fantasy fair movies like Bond but there's nothing wrong with it from a moral or ethical standpoint as i already outlined. As I said, you don't like it? Fair enough but to suggest I've missed something or I don't understand is bullshit.
  • Posts: 6,396
    bondsum wrote:
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    That wasn't even the question! I asked you how Bond was supposed to have prevented Silva from murdering her?
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited August 2013 Posts: 11,139
    bondsum wrote:
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    No one expects you to rewrite anything. If I had my way, SF would have told a completely different story altogether, much like many other people have their own ideas on what they want to see in a Bond film. However, you prove my point that you simply didn't like what was conveyed and further support what I said in my previous post, Bond's appeal is about being an interesting not necessarilly about being liked. He has failed to do things in the past and he'll fail to do things in the future. Not everyone is going to like how things play out but the least we can hope for is that it's interesting and the Severine dynamic easily fits into that category.


  • Posts: 2,483
    doubleoego wrote:
    This is ridiculous. It's just a movie. Some English guy who gets paid to kill people incites shock and horror because he has sex with a former prostitute??? Give me a break! Bond wanted to get to Silva, offered to kill Silva(which he eventually did)? Wanted Severine to take him to meet Silva (which she did) and this is all with both flirting with each other. She INVITES him to come aboard (literally and figuratively) if he survives the goons. We then see Severine, waiting anxiously for Bond to come, she has champagne on ice to help set the mood, which Bond would have seen once he came aboard, took of his clothes before porking her in the shower, which was clearly consented by Severine. If she wasn't interested in Bond's British end then she would have made the necessary objections similarly to Maude Adams in TMWTGG.

    I get the feeling some people are overly more upset that Bond didn't cry or mourne after Severine bit the dust. Sorry but Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission, these things happen. it has before and will continue to happen. Bond had a lot more things to worry about in an increasingly short amount of time. Bond's appeal is that he's interesting moreso than him being liked.

    And as I said, one it's just a movie and if people don't like what happened fair enough but it doesn't mean it was wrong or Bond was morally corrupt at the time. 2 consenting adults had sex emphasis on consenting, it's what people do. Welcome to life on Earth.

    Bravo.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    That wasn't even the question! I asked you how Bond was supposed to have prevented Silva from murdering her?

    Suddenly, Bond spotted Severing being marched out, blood tinkling down her lip. He'd seen this march before, he knew what this was leading to. An execution. He glanced at his hand. Still shaking a bit, too much for the twisted William Tell nonsense he imagined was coming from where they were setting her up. Words were coming from Silva's mouth, but Bond didn't hear them, he was too deep into calculations, angles that might save them both. As the gun neared him, he didn't wait for it; he snatched it and shot at Silva's chest. The vest Silva wore saved his life, but he fell back hard. Even before the men began firing, Bond was seeking cover. He caught a glance from Severine as she shrunk behind the rock as best she could. He was being surrounded. Before he could formulate a new plan with what pitifully little he had to work with, the sound of helicopter blades ripped through the air...
  • Posts: 2,483
    It's hard to be a Bond fan and a feminist at the same time and I can't ignore the problematic stuff envolving Severine in SF. I can't say I didn't like her (God, that beautiful piece from SF score still manages to make me cry), but Severine compared to Camille in QoS is a big backpedal. They don't need to be sexualized! I hope they will bring us girls with more attitude in the next films because the old damsel in distress archetipe is so boring and so last century. But still, I have seen worse, tbh.

    Btw, yes, it's just a movie, but you know... It's frustrating when they be could exploring different types of women. I care about this franchise and I want to be able to say that I'm proud of everything they do.

    P.S.: Misogyny is also about objectification of women. Just so you know...

    Rambettes with attitudes bigger than their bazoomas are even more boring than damsels in distress. I mean, they're so now.

    And misogyny is hatred of women. Period. Reading a Penthouse or ramming a downtrodden babe in the shower doesn't make one a misogynist.

  • edited August 2013 Posts: 6,396
    @doubleoego you got your quotes mixed up there mate (7:46pm). I don't want to be accused of saying something I didn't ;-)
  • Posts: 2,483
    bondsum wrote:
    And I'd love to hear your suggestions for how Bond was meant to protect Severine at that point when it was pretty clear he had no chance in saving her, being outnumbered.
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?

    Well, what is it about having consensual sex with her that is so evil? For crying out loud, he made love to her, he didn't beat her to a pulp, rape her and murder her. It seems far too many people have internalized the fatuous feminist fiction that heterosexual sex is hate crime against women.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,283
    bondsum wrote:
    And I'd love to hear your suggestions for how Bond was meant to protect Severine at that point when it was pretty clear he had no chance in saving her, being outnumbered.
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?

    Well, what is it about having consensual sex with her that is so evil? For crying out loud, he made love to her, he didn't beat her to a pulp, rape her and murder her. It seems far too many people have internalized the fatuous feminist fiction that heterosexual sex is hate crime against women.

    Yes, and of course lack of consent is the key element in rape. Consensual sex between both parties can never amount to rape unless one carries on with sexual activity while the other asks that person to stop - only then will it become rape. Consent is the key word here.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,283
    Gerard wrote:
    bondsum wrote:
    Correct me if I'm wrong, @WillyGalore, but is there any mention in the movie versions of Dr No and DAF of either Honey Ryder or Tiffany Case both being gang-raped when they were children, or are you alluding to the books by Ian Fleming? It's the movies we're discussing here.

    Honey's rape was mentioned in the movie. Although they changed the method she used to kill her rapist (scorpion in the book, black widow spider in the movie). For Tiffany Case and Pussy Galore, that was left aside for the movies.

    Such matters were of course highly controversial at the time - the 1960s.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    chrisisall wrote:
    That wasn't even the question! I asked you how Bond was supposed to have prevented Silva from murdering her?

    Suddenly, Bond spotted Severing being marched out, blood tinkling down her lip. He'd seen this march before, he knew what this was leading to. An execution. He glanced at his hand. Still shaking a bit, too much for the twisted William Tell nonsense he imagined was coming from where they were setting her up. Words were coming from Silva's mouth, but Bond didn't hear them, he was too deep into calculations, angles that might save them both. As the gun neared him, he didn't wait for it; he snatched it and shot at Silva's chest. The vest Silva wore saved his life, but he fell back hard. Even before the men began firing, Bond was seeking cover. He caught a glance from Severine as she shrunk behind the rock as best she could. He was being surrounded. Before he could formulate a new plan with what pitifully little he had to work with, the sound of helicopter blades ripped through the air...

    So, no comment here? It couldn't have gone this way? :-??
  • Posts: 2,483
    chrisisall wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    That wasn't even the question! I asked you how Bond was supposed to have prevented Silva from murdering her?

    Suddenly, Bond spotted Severing being marched out, blood tinkling down her lip. He'd seen this march before, he knew what this was leading to. An execution. He glanced at his hand. Still shaking a bit, too much for the twisted William Tell nonsense he imagined was coming from where they were setting her up. Words were coming from Silva's mouth, but Bond didn't hear them, he was too deep into calculations, angles that might save them both. As the gun neared him, he didn't wait for it; he snatched it and shot at Silva's chest. The vest Silva wore saved his life, but he fell back hard. Even before the men began firing, Bond was seeking cover. He caught a glance from Severine as she shrunk behind the rock as best she could. He was being surrounded. Before he could formulate a new plan with what pitifully little he had to work with, the sound of helicopter blades ripped through the air...

    So, no comment here? It couldn't have gone this way? :-??

    I think you've done a good job, but I'm not sure Bond could have known what was in store until it was about to happen, and by that point it was too late to plausibly save Severine and himself.

  • Rambettes with attitudes bigger than their bazoomas are even more boring than damsels in distress. I mean, they're so now.

    And misogyny is hatred of women. Period. Reading a Penthouse or ramming a downtrodden babe in the shower doesn't make one a misogynist.

    So. Problematic. The definition of misogyny goes much further than that. No, having a healthy sex life is okay, consented sex with a babe is okay. But comparing attitudes with breasts is not.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 908
    bondsum wrote:
    And I'd love to hear your suggestions for how Bond was meant to protect Severine at that point when it was pretty clear he had no chance in saving her, being outnumbered.
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?

    Well, what is it about having consensual sex with her that is so evil? For crying out loud, he made love to her, he didn't beat her to a pulp, rape her and murder her. It seems far too many people have internalized the fatuous feminist fiction that heterosexual sex is hate crime against women.

    If she had been working as a Sex Slave since her childhood it stands to reason, that her mind and will have been broken a long time ago. So even if she had offered herself to Bond on a Silver tablet it would not equal something like Lust or willingness. It's just that simple!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,283
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    bondsum wrote:
    And I'd love to hear your suggestions for how Bond was meant to protect Severine at that point when it was pretty clear he had no chance in saving her, being outnumbered.
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?

    Well, what is it about having consensual sex with her that is so evil? For crying out loud, he made love to her, he didn't beat her to a pulp, rape her and murder her. It seems far too many people have internalized the fatuous feminist fiction that heterosexual sex is hate crime against women.

    If she had been working as a Sex Slave since her childhood it stands to reason, that her mind and will have been broken a long time ago. So even if she had offered herself to Bond on a Silver tablet it would not equal something like Lust or willingness. It's just that simple!

    Yes, I suppose that it is the "habit of a lifetime", correct?
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 11,189
    I don't agree that Bond is a misogynist. That's a label that's been pinned to the character by the likes of Paul Johnson with his "Sex, Snobbery and Sadism" review and various avid anti-Bond and an anti-Fleming types such as Anthony Boucher and his ilk.



    Not to mention Judi Dench ;)

    I've not read through all the posts that have come up since I was online so forgive me if I repeat what others have said. I was talking to @acoppola a few days ago who said the same thing and I've been thinking about it a little since. I too referred to Bond as a mysoganist and they disagreed. Thinking about it maybe "mysoganist" is too strong a word, however I think its fair to say the original character of James Bond (i.e. the literary character) didn't think very highly of women (at least when they were outside the kitchen). You just need to read Casino Royale to discover that. I don't recall him actually HITTING a woman though (something he did do in the early films and I'm glad he doesn't do now). Personally I don't have too many problems imagining the character Fleming wrote sleeping with someone like Severine. He'd be entranced by her outer beauty and inner vulnerability. My issue is that they killed her off. As much as I love Skyfall I think its a shame her character is never mentioned again once she dies (at least Paris Carver got one throw away mention later on in TND).

    I try not to think about this too much though as ultimately it is fiction. Some seem to think wayyy too much into this though.
  • bondsum wrote:
    And I'd love to hear your suggestions for how Bond was meant to protect Severine at that point when it was pretty clear he had no chance in saving her, being outnumbered.
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?

    Well, what is it about having consensual sex with her that is so evil? For crying out loud, he made love to her, he didn't beat her to a pulp, rape her and murder her. It seems far too many people have internalized the fatuous feminist fiction that heterosexual sex is hate crime against women.

    I've truly been trying to stay out of all of this but PK, your statement and view as stated is right as rain. What was it M said in CR, about "self righteous ass prigs". Those who feel Severine's SEDUCTION OF BOND was anything remotely approaching rape have completely lost their minds!

    When Miss Anders, as an emotionally damaged woman offers herself as well as the Solex to Bond if he would kill Scaramanga, no one is calling that anything but what it is. Severine does exactly the same thing! She tells Bond what she wants him to do, where she will be, and for how long if he can get out of the casino alive. He does, and the next scene we see is Severine dressed in nothing but a robe, two glasses of bubbly at hand, and looking very disappointed when he isn't there where her boat leaves the dock. Well, if she isn't looking to have sex with Bond as part of the bargain, she surely isn't dressed for a business transaction if killing Silva is all she wanted to get from Bond! How can anybody with any real world experience mistake this or what follows, as she CLEARLY isn't being forced by Bond to do anything in the shower she doesn't want to. She has a small army of guards armed to the teeth she merely has to alert if sex isn't part of her offer. Not to mention she gives a hint of a smile when she realizes he is in the shower with her and accepted the deal she offered.

    This world, which now includes this Forum, has gone completely PC crazy. And not in a good way.




  • Posts: 11,189
    I agree @SirHenry

    I suppose the problem people have is whether this sort of behaviour is acceptable from Bond in 2013. I have to be honest: when I first saw it onscreen I didn't give it a second thought.
  • Posts: 2,483
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    bondsum wrote:
    And I'd love to hear your suggestions for how Bond was meant to protect Severine at that point when it was pretty clear he had no chance in saving her, being outnumbered.
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?

    Well, what is it about having consensual sex with her that is so evil? For crying out loud, he made love to her, he didn't beat her to a pulp, rape her and murder her. It seems far too many people have internalized the fatuous feminist fiction that heterosexual sex is hate crime against women.

    If she had been working as a Sex Slave since her childhood it stands to reason, that her mind and will have been broken a long time ago. So even if she had offered herself to Bond on a Silver tablet it would not equal something like Lust or willingness. It's just that simple!

    No, it's not that simple. You are imputing in Severine's psyche only what you suspect but do not know. None of us have any way of knowing how resilient or fragile Severine--a fictional character, BTW--is. Individuals are different. Some are hardier than others. I choose to believe Severine was made of sterner stuff than you do, that Bond recognized this resilience and acted accordingly.

  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited August 2013 Posts: 18,283
    Matt_Helm wrote:
    bondsum wrote:
    And I'd love to hear your suggestions for how Bond was meant to protect Severine at that point when it was pretty clear he had no chance in saving her, being outnumbered.
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?

    Well, what is it about having consensual sex with her that is so evil? For crying out loud, he made love to her, he didn't beat her to a pulp, rape her and murder her. It seems far too many people have internalized the fatuous feminist fiction that heterosexual sex is hate crime against women.

    If she had been working as a Sex Slave since her childhood it stands to reason, that her mind and will have been broken a long time ago. So even if she had offered herself to Bond on a Silver tablet it would not equal something like Lust or willingness. It's just that simple!

    No, it's not that simple. You are imputing in Severine's psyche only what you suspect but do not know. None of us have any way of knowing how resilient or fragile Severine--a fictional character, BTW--is. Individuals are different. Some are hardier than others. I choose to believe Severine was made of sterner stuff than you do, that Bond recognized this resilience and acted accordingly.

    Yes, I think you have something there - she was perhaps "iron painted as wood" as was said of my avatar Lord Home (or made of sterner stuff as you say). Severine must have built up an amazing resilience off-screen, surely in the face of much adversity in her life as a sex slave making money for her unscrupulous masters. In her last scene she is a tragic, bloodied and down-at-heel figure who dies a tragic and indeed needless death.
  • Posts: 2,483
    bondsum wrote:
    And I'd love to hear your suggestions for how Bond was meant to protect Severine at that point when it was pretty clear he had no chance in saving her, being outnumbered.
    I wouldn't have made Severine a sex-slave supposedly rescued from Macau for starters, especially if I was going to have Bond fail to save her, therefore she would have been just another femme fatale who doesn't make it to the 2nd reel like Andrea Anders. Seriously, do you expect me to rewrite what's already been written by the script writers?

    Looks like @doubleoego doesn't get it either. "Severine was collateral damage in the middle of a huge mission." Good job Fleming didn't think like you otherwise Pussy Galore, Tiffany Case and Honey Rider would have all been dispensed with after he'd given them a good "porking" as you so eloquently put in your best Fleming prose.

    PS. It doesn't offend me. Good god, it'd take more than a PG13 movie to upset my sensibilities. I'm merely pointing out that it's not in keeping with Fleming when dealing with an emotionally damaged woman, for which I've included examples in previous posts. Is it so hard for some of you to work out?

    Well, what is it about having consensual sex with her that is so evil? For crying out loud, he made love to her, he didn't beat her to a pulp, rape her and murder her. It seems far too many people have internalized the fatuous feminist fiction that heterosexual sex is hate crime against women.

    I've truly been trying to stay out of all of this but PK, your statement and view as stated is right as rain. What was it M said in CR, about "self righteous ass prigs". Those who feel Severine's SEDUCTION OF BOND was anything remotely approaching rape have completely lost their minds!

    When Miss Anders, as an emotionally damaged woman offers herself as well as the Solex to Bond if he would kill Scaramanga, no one is calling that anything but what it is. Severine does exactly the same thing! She tells Bond what she wants him to do, where she will be, and for how long if he can get out of the casino alive. He does, and the next scene we see is Severine dressed in nothing but a robe, two glasses of bubbly at hand, and looking very disappointed when he isn't there where her boat leaves the dock. Well, if she isn't looking to have sex with Bond as part of the bargain, she surely isn't dressed for a business transaction if killing Silva is all she wanted to get from Bond! How can anybody with any real world experience mistake this or what follows, as she CLEARLY isn't being forced by Bond to do anything in the shower she doesn't want to. She has a small army of guards armed to the teeth she merely has to alert if sex isn't part of her offer. Not to mention she gives a hint of a smile when she realizes he is in the shower with her and accepted the deal she offered.

    This world, which now includes this Forum, has gone completely PC crazy. And not in a good way.




    If Bond behaved as the more hypersensitive types wished, he'd still be a virgin. I daresay there's not a man among us who would ignored Severine in that situation.
  • BAIN123 wrote:
    I agree @SirHenry

    I suppose the problem people have is whether this sort of behaviour is acceptable from Bond in 2013. I have to be honest: when I first saw it onscreen I didn't give it a second thought.

    I see we've discussed Pussy and Pat Fearing, which far more suggest less than consensual sex, and Severine seducing Bond is a problem????? This whole premise is absolutely absurd. I'm seriously not trying to brag, and I swear it's true- I've had hundreds of women and any woman expecting not to have sex is certainly not going to start entertaining me in a bathrobe, which is how she is dressed waiting for him. If she isn't trying to send me a message, she's going to excuse herself to change with something like "I'm sorry, I just got out of the shower, please excuse me while I change", or if not tell me up front not to form any ideas based on her dress. Trust me, women are not stupid and it seems some people must think Severine is brain dead and has no control of herself.

    Bain, like I've said, some of these posters as well as Faulks have absolutely lost their minds. Thanks at @doubleoego who has been trying to explain this already.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    This world, which now includes this Forum, has gone completely PC crazy. And not in a good way.
    There IS a bit of that going around, eh?
    Bottom line, why set her up as a sympathetic character in need of saving just to kill her off in such a sadistic meaningless way when she a) could have been there of her own will so her dying is more of less on her, or b) written to actually make it through the situation so she could live to die another day?
    IMO the PC reactions here are an intellectual smokescreen for pure dislike of the simplistic audience manipulation. Dark for the sake of dark is beginning to wear thin, as I believe we are seeing on this thread.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited August 2013 Posts: 18,283
    chrisisall wrote:
    This world, which now includes this Forum, has gone completely PC crazy. And not in a good way.
    There IS a bit of that going around, eh?
    Bottom line, why set her up as a sympathetic character in need of saving just to kill her off in such a sadistic meaningless way when she a) could have been there of her own will so her dying is more of less on her, or b) written to actually make it through the situation so she could live to die another day?
    IMO the PC reactions here are an intellectual smokescreen for pure dislike of the simplistic audience manipulation. Dark for the sake of dark is beginning to wear thin, as I believe we are seeing on this thread.

    Yes, this death scene and the shower scene seem to be the two main points of contention, but Bond films have been on this brutal path since at least the senseless Zorin miners massacre in AVTAK way back in 1985, let us not forget that even for a moment. Yes, her character went through a lot only to be brutally and needlessly killed by Silva seemingly just in order to "up" his villainous profile and credentials. It left a bitter taste in the mouths of many, however. On the positive side, I do think the debate is very intellectual here on MI6 Community - there is no smokescreen there to be found, @chrisisall. No minds lost here either, Sir Henry.
  • Dragonpol wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    This world, which now includes this Forum, has gone completely PC crazy. And not in a good way.
    There IS a bit of that going around, eh?
    Bottom line, why set her up as a sympathetic character in need of saving just to kill her off in such a sadistic meaningless way when she a) could have been there of her own will so her dying is more of less on her, or b) written to actually make it through the situation so she could live to die another day?
    IMO the PC reactions here are an intellectual smokescreen for pure dislike of the simplistic audience manipulation. Dark for the sake of dark is beginning to wear thin, as I believe we are seeing on this thread.

    Yes, this death scene and the shower scene seem to be the two main points of contention, but Bond films have been on this brutal path since at least the senseless Zorin miners massacre in AVTAK way back in 1985, let us not forget that even for a moment. Yes, her character went through a lot only to be brutally and needlessly killed by Silva seemingly just in order to "up" his villainous profile and credentials. It left a bitter taste in the mouths of many, however. On the positive side, I do think the debate is very intellectual here on MI6 Community - there is no smokescreen there to be found, @chrisisall. No minds lost here either, Sir Henry.

    I also have a bitter taste in my mouth about Severine, but that's only with her being the sacrificial lamb that Bond fails to save. The shower scene is nothing more than two people who consensually want to get it on, and arguments to the contrary are complete BS unless one has an agenda or too inexperienced to know any better when it comes to what happens between a man and a woman.

  • The plot does make it clear that Bond is outnumbered in the William Tell scene itself. Unfortunately this very nasty scene is about the only one I can believe in in the movie up to this point, along with Bond having to jettison an agent dying in the field. So there we have it: I can't believe the ludicrous action scenes including throwing himself off a bike onto a train by crashing it into a bridge, or falling hundreds of feet off a bridge and surviving and so on, but this nasty scene is very true.

    So the whole film is a daft romp that can't be believed - but the one scene that you do believe is plain nasty. Not my idea of escapism. Of course, Bond does his heroics after the death, then we get a silly burst of brass when the CGI helicopters close in! Like, wa-hay, isn't Bond the man!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,283
    Dragonpol wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    This world, which now includes this Forum, has gone completely PC crazy. And not in a good way.
    There IS a bit of that going around, eh?
    Bottom line, why set her up as a sympathetic character in need of saving just to kill her off in such a sadistic meaningless way when she a) could have been there of her own will so her dying is more of less on her, or b) written to actually make it through the situation so she could live to die another day?
    IMO the PC reactions here are an intellectual smokescreen for pure dislike of the simplistic audience manipulation. Dark for the sake of dark is beginning to wear thin, as I believe we are seeing on this thread.

    Yes, this death scene and the shower scene seem to be the two main points of contention, but Bond films have been on this brutal path since at least the senseless Zorin miners massacre in AVTAK way back in 1985, let us not forget that even for a moment. Yes, her character went through a lot only to be brutally and needlessly killed by Silva seemingly just in order to "up" his villainous profile and credentials. It left a bitter taste in the mouths of many, however. On the positive side, I do think the debate is very intellectual here on MI6 Community - there is no smokescreen there to be found, @chrisisall. No minds lost here either, Sir Henry.

    I also have a bitter taste in my mouth about Severine, but that's only with her being the sacrificial lamb that Bond fails to save. The shower scene is nothing more than two people who consensually want to get it on, and arguments to the contrary are complete BS unless one has an agenda or too inexperienced to know any better when it comes to what happens between a man and a woman.

    Well, I don't think that any sensible person doubts it was consensual between Severine and Bond. The issue is rather, even if she was ready and willing should Bond have bowed to her wishes or not, realising she was very vulnerable. Think of Camille in QoS or Gala Brand in the MR novel, if you will.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,283
    The plot does make it clear that Bond is outnumbered in the William Tell scene itself. Unfortunately this very nasty scene is about the only one I can believe in in the movie up to this point, along with Bond having to jettison an agent dying in the field. So there we have it: I can't believe the ludicrous action scenes including throwing himself off a bike onto a train by crashing it into a bridge, or falling hundreds of feet off a bridge and surviving and so on, but this nasty scene is very true.

    So the whole film is a daft romp that can't be believed - but the one scene that you do believe is plain nasty. Not my idea of escapism. Of course, Bond does his heroics after the death, then we get a silly burst of brass when the CGI helicopters close in! Like, wa-hay, isn't Bond the man!

    Yes, quite.

    I'm writing a piece entitled 'James Bond, William Tell and the apple-shot Act' which deals specifically with this scene. Have a look out for it on the blog, TBB.
Sign In or Register to comment.