›

Can Bond fight Middle East terrorist organizations in the future ?

JamesSpectreJamesSpectre
edited November 2015 in Bond Movies Posts: 164
In the light of the Paris attacks and everything that happened in 2015, do you think Bond could fight the types of Al Quaeda or ISIS on screen in the future ? In like a series of ultra realistic movies. I think Spectre is also quite current to a certain extent. So how would you feel about that ?

Comments

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Let's keep Bond fighting people that won't cause audience alienation. Let's leave ISIS, Al Quaeda and other terrorist outfits to the news channels. They don't need to grace the platform of Bond movies. People are still reeling from the mujahideen in TLD.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,127
    We've had similar threads before.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Let's keep Bond fighting people that won't cause audience alienation. Let's leave ISIS, Al Quaeda and other terrorist outfits to the news channels. They don't need to grace the platform of Bond movies. People are still reeling from the mujahideen in TLD.
    Agreed. Bond should try not to date itself where possible. With all the shifting geopolitical allegiances in the Middle East (almost from year to year) it really could looking silly if not done carefully. I don't have confidence in the script writers not to mess it up (in a way that could easily date the film).
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Let's keep Bond fighting people that won't cause audience alienation. Let's leave ISIS, Al Quaeda and other terrorist outfits to the news channels. They don't need to grace the platform of Bond movies. People are still reeling from the mujahideen in TLD.

    Yeah we really wouldn't want to damage the box office among the pro ISIS demographic would we?

    However to answer the original question I would probably say no. Not for any snivelling reasons about not wanting to offend anyone but because dramatically these people are just too dull for Bond's universe.

    It's fine to allude to the real world like with Le Chiffre and 9/11 but Bond lives in a slightly heightened fantasy universe. And that's a place with fascinating villains like Drax and Blofeld and their cunning schemes.

    Just running into a restaurant and shooting innocent people really doesn't cut the mustard for a Bond plot for me.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,187
    @Ludovico is correct:
    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/4704/bond-against-the-taliban-al-qaeda/p1
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,127
    Can we merge the threads?
  • Suivez_ce_parachuteSuivez_ce_parachute
    edited November 2015 Posts: 2,015
    The bomb in stadium reference will sound quite weird in the following weeks, clearly. But paradoxically, the fact that SPECTRE is a movie about false flag attacks may help ridiculing all those who think what happened were false flag attacks. They think they are the most clever of the bunch, but what they actually believe in is some blockbuster' simplistic plot. They are people who think that Blofeld exists.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    TheWizardOfIce wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Let's keep Bond fighting people that won't cause audience alienation. Let's leave ISIS, Al Quaeda and other terrorist outfits to the news channels. They don't need to grace the platform of Bond movies. People are still reeling from the mujahideen in TLD.

    Yeah we really wouldn't want to damage the box office among the pro ISIS demographic would we?

    It's not about appeasing pro ISIS but more to do with huge groups of people who misinterpret the films as attacking or painting Islam in general in a bad light to which there's already enough of that. Bond doesnt need to traverse that sand storm.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    It's better if he continues to fight a 'hypothetical' threat, because as mentioned, things change and allegiances change. e.g mujahideen, or Russia as perfect examples (well Russia is not so much a friend now, but it's not exactly an enemy either......Lavrov and Kerry were standing side by side today).

    Same goes for China (not exactly a stated enemy now.....but I seem to recall the derogatory term 'red' China in some earlier film).

    I think TND & YOLT handled it well when trying to incorporate real countries into the plot......
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    In light of what has happened in the last 24 hours, I think we should park this thread for a while?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,127
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's better if he continues to fight a 'hypothetical' threat, because as mentioned, things change and allegiances change. e.g mujahideen, or Russia as perfect examples (well Russia is not so much a friend now, but it's not exactly an enemy either......Lavrov and Kerry were standing side by side today).

    Same goes for China (not exactly a stated enemy now.....but I seem to recall the derogatory term 'red' China in some earlier film).

    I think TND & YOLT handled it well when trying to incorporate real countries into the plot......

    In a way, Blofeld (or indeed any Bond villain) is more like a metaphor or a symbol of modern threats. Blofeld is a terrorist, so was Silva, but they are not ideologically motivated. Terrorism is their motivation.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    It's hard to discuss these matters without seeming glib and unsympathetic. So I think I speak for us all in saying that a Bond-ISIS/Al Qaeda discussion is not meant to trivialize the real horror that those in Paris encountered.

    Now, that aside...

    To me, Spectre should be an organization that "manipulates" political upheaval for profit. I believe Quantum operated in the same way.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    TripAces wrote: »
    To me, Spectre should be an organization that "manipulates" political upheaval for profit. I believe Quantum operated in the same way.
    I agree. I think they handled it very well in QoS. Looking back on it, the way Quantum operated and what they were up to (Greene's brilliant speech to Medrano quoted below) is exactly what SPECTRE should be doing:

    "But you should know something about me and the people I work with. We deal with the left or the right, with dictators or liberators. If the current president had been more agreeable. I wouldn't be talking to you. So, if you decide not to sign, you will wake up with your balls in your mouth and your willing replacement standing over you. If you doubt that, then shoot me, take that money and have a good night's sleep."
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Let's keep Bond fighting people that won't cause audience alienation. Let's leave ISIS, Al Quaeda and other terrorist outfits to the news channels. They don't need to grace the platform of Bond movies. People are still reeling from the mujahideen in TLD.

    Yes. That scum gets enough airtime as is.
  • tigers99tigers99
    Posts: 582
    I think we should leave these organisations out of the Bond films. The media does enough to spread their propaganda material as it is. I like the serious gritty Bonds, but for me part of the Bond cocktail is also a dose (varies across the films of course) of not taking themselves too seriously as well. It would be hard to know how it could be done sensitively given in mind the real world atrocities that these people commit.
Sign In or Register to comment.