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
and anything that keeps Bond relevant, in my opinion is a good thing.
The days of an all white, all straight service have gone. ;)
This isn't something I'm fighting for, I merely assumed that the new Q was gay.
Dear oh dear chaps. This isnt the 70's.
In all honesty though I cant say I didnt chortle at both of the above!
Why would you assume that?
So being gay is contemporary? That's a new one.
Let's face it, a character whose sexuality is irrelevant, 'outing' them as gay would just be a sop to the PC crowd, who wouldn't stop there. They wouldn't be satisfied until all traces of chauvinism are gone from Bond, until Bond is black etc.
Bond will go the way Doctor Who has I'm sure.
contemporary, as in reflective of the modern world, and not the 1950s. ;)
Maybe Q is asexual. Single man, living with two cats...
Oh and incidentally, there was a good deal of allusions to homosexuality in Fleming's novels. A lot of his villains may be gay, for instance.
Nothing to do with digital v film - it's the colour palette and how it's shot. Muted colours throughout, with lots of browns and creams. A fine looking film, but there are parts in Skyfall that just take the breath away, and I have to say that the ladies weren't shot as well as they could be, both leading ladies have been better served in other films.
No particular reason. Logan wrote it, Whishaw made it his own. No need to make it a 'thing', Just don't see him bedding MP.
No, I just don't want a character whose sexuality is completely irrelevant to be outed as gay for no reason other than to rub our noses in it's modernity.
I had no problem with wint and kidd, gay characters in a 1971 film. Why? Because their sexuality was relevant to their characters and not a PC gesture.
The homintern.Read anything on the Kim Philby days, and it will catch you up on the likes of Burgess, MacLean, Blunt..the Cambridge gang.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/so-whats-new-about-gay-spies-1253692.html
Horowitz has a gay section chief in his new Bond book, circa 1957
I think be had to include at least one to keep the book authentic ;)
3 more sleeps till SP first viewing.
I must say, this will be best informed ahead of time viewing ever.
Not only all the information revealed in the leaks, but also all the spoilers in this thread and the latest leaks postings, have updated all changes to the Dec draft.
With first viewing Friday will finally get chance to see how finished story holds together on screen.
I wonder why the press made such a big fuss over a female M etc, when apparently spy films have always been full of strong female, black and gay characters. ;)
The conversation started from the suggestion that Sir Hilary made of Q being in MP's bed. Whether you find that illuminating or not (I rather fancy it didn't even register with you), it tells you something about her character, she's heterosexual (or if you want to nitpick, potentially bisexual and wouldn't that get 007 hot under the collar). Transpose Q into a similar scenario and I don't see why a man being in his bed would be a PC move, merely a little nod to character. This is a new Q, he can be anything the writers want him to be.
On a side note, as @Timmer points out, what's modern about a gay man in the service? And as @Thunderpussy points out, there's certainly a lack of authenticity in these areas. No need to layer it on, but sometimes for the sake of variety it's nice to play with character. It's only reflecting what's in front of most of us. Unless you choose not to see it.
I thought some may be interested in this link. These guys represent the "second line" in that they are not on Bond forums and not going into the forensic detail that we do (sometimes) etc but they are UK movie fans who have seen the film within the first week.
Hmm so C's accent is listed as one of the really bad bits of the film according to the first post. Rather ridiculous nit picking.
The non Bond fan forums I visit seem to be about 90% in favour of SP albeit still preferring CR and SF.
In place of modernity I should have written liberal metropolitan credentials.
Q's private life is not a part of Bond. Never has been and never should be. I would equally object to Q telling bond about his girlfriend.
You didn't answer my point about Wint and Kidd, gay characters that appeared in DAF in 1971. As Sherlock Holmes would say, the distinction is clear.
The old 'it's not part of Bond' argument. Anything can be part of Bond, you don't get to decide that old boy.
'The love story was about as convincing as Attack of The Clones'
Oooooh that stings.
Trouble is he's not that far off the mark. Not quite as bad because Lea and Dan are in a different league acting wise to Natalie and Hayden and even P&W's best hack writing can't plumb the depths of George's dismal dialogue.
I too have issues with Mr Hinx and his motivation.
Is he working for SPECTRE? If that's the case then does Ernst want Bond dead before he lets him know that 'he is the author of all his pain'?
I thought the whole point was that he wanted to look Bond in the eye and let him know it was him all along.
Or perhaps maybe that's an incidental pleasure but he's not going to let it interfere with the Nine Eyes plan so he does want Bond dead if at all possible so sets Hinx on his trail.
But if he's worried about Bond foiling him why does he then send the car to pick him up? Is this just classic Bond villain hubris in wanting tell a Bond his whole plan before he kills him?
Don't you realise that kowtowing to the PC liberals has only one logical conclusion?
Actually I suspect you wouldn't care.
The netting is coming for containing rubble in controlled explosions. Especially in cases where some pre detonation demolition has taken place. In this case MI6 heavily damaged from Skyfall the netting would be to stop debris falling to the foyer while the demolition experts sussed our how best to bring it down.
Initial impressions is that this was a good film, and one which, for me, surpasses Skyfall by virtue of having a story which makes sense, and a hero who at least helps to save the day.
That said, it's not a film without problems. One which struck me very quickly is that Craig's Bond is still swaggering about with the same attitude he had in Skyfall - that is, sullen, surly and a bit of a prick.
Bond has never had the greatest respect for authority figures, but his early exchange with M is just downright rude, hostile and insubordinate. The fact that M allows such behavior, and then an even worse exchange with 'C', just doesn't strike me as believable.
In Skyfall, Bond looked on dispassionately as a woman he'd just bedded was gunned down. In Spectre, he saves Belluci's character from a similar fate, and I wondered if this was in response to the Skyfall criticism. But with his generally callous demeanour you're left with the impression this heroism was ONLY because it served his wider agenda.
It just strikes me that there's a sense of humanity missing from Craig's Bond. From my perspective it was present in Casino Royale, where I felt Craig played the character perfectly, but either he or the producers appear to have decided that the loss of Vesper has robbed him of that. As a consequence, the po-faced character sometimes comes across as a bit unsympathetic and unlikable. Although Dalton played the role close to the source material, you still got a sense of warmth, compassion, and some playfulness and fun.
Back to Spectre, and I think the greatest problem is the central romance. Madeline Swan is introduced far too late in the game, and given no real character. Let's face it, she's pretty bland and anemic, and it's difficult to imagine her ever replacing Vesper as the great love in Bond's life, let alone doing that so quickly. Bond and Swan share one train journey, devoid of any of the chemistry seen between Bond and Vesper on their brief train encounter in Casino Royale, and yet after that you've suddenly got Swan declaring her love for this man she's known for five minutes.
Another flaw is the screenwriters and producers' apparent desire to turn what was a series of standalone movies into an ongoing melodrama. The idea that Blofeld is Bond's adopted brother is something straight out of a soap opera, and a completely unnecessary personalisation of the threat. It's a big world, but all of Bond's adventures are now tied into a family feud?
Spectre is largely an investigatory film, with Bond probing this mysterious threat, but the threat itself is so poorly defined until late in the day that there isn't a really pressing sense of danger, jeopardy and what's truly at stake.
Also, it unfolds in the style of a computer game like Uncharted, developing hugely episodically, stopping and starting. It moves from one location to the next, with a lot of talking heads delivering exposition before some furious action sequence button pressing, the level is complete, and we move on to the next location.
Now it may seem that I'm very down on Spectre, but for all this I did enjoy it. The opening pre-titles sequence is one of the all-time best, there's some great casting, fantastic locations, and a story that actually does hold together.
I just can't help but feel that the script should, and very easily could, have been so much better with some judicious editing and restructuring.
And while it's nowhere near as good as Casino Royale, it is, for me, a step-up over the style-over-substance entry Skyfall.
Desk
Q being a heterosexual male is sacrosanct?
Not really. But it's pointless to mention it either way....he's a minor character.
Yep bull shit PC for P 's sake.