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
You literally just gave us an anecdote :D
Clearly impressionable, and even not terribly impressionable, people see Bond as aspirational and copy him in all sorts of ways, from buying his watches, ordering his drinks, driving his cars, wearing his clothes etc. you just have to look at the millions didn’t on product placement and looking around forums like these. So it’s inevitable that some of his attitudes in everyday life will permeate too.
To be fair, Bond probably wouldn’t have minded her calling the police at that point!
Yes that’s a good point, I regard TB as a step backwards from GF in many ways, failing to learn many aspects from GF which did work, but that is a step forward. Shame about the Pat scene though, yes.
It’s also something Fleming knew, but he was working in a different time, and was much more self-present in the work.
Bond has usually been “progressive” for the time in which it is being written or made, and it’s only with retrospect that that is hidden. Saying that, I have always found the Connery films to be less so, and not always even in keeping with Flemings own views, but literature is a different more internal thing than film.
Much has been made of late, for example, of Bonds ‘well, I’m not going to go rescue the silly bitch’ stuff in Casino Royale, but it ignores the fact that *even as Bond is saying/thinking this* he’s actually getting ready to do precisely that. It’s a deliberate contradiction between thought and action, because fundamentally, Bond is actually not much of a bastard, even when he is pretending to be, *even to himself*.
That last ‘the bitch is dead’ means and works differently on the page when you realise that, and it’s a fair bit of credit to Craig that he managed to do that in the screen performance too. If we focus on just the language, it could be well argued that it’s misogynistic nonsense, but fundamentally it’s a man heavily downplaying his *actual* feelings, and trying to pile anger on something to avoid dealing with the much harder to face reality.
After that, Bond is a person running away from or avoiding something in some regards, and that includes his approach to sex — he is often on Her/His Majesties Secret Sex Worker Service, where he is literally being paid to get information or advantage etc by sleeping with people. This works for him as every other vice does, it’s just marking time because he may be gone tomorrow.
Bond is a very lonely person, as broken winged as the women he ends up with.
Rather than putting Fleming's writing aside, I would consider it one of the major reasons (along from plain old decency) for why Bond shouldn't force himself on a woman--if Bond's creator didn't see any reason for him to, why should the films? Yes, Fleming's writing can be "problematic" in other areas, but here he's clearly in the right, and has delineated part of the Bond's essential character.
Are you not getting enough James... previously...
Pussy seems interested, definitely. And of course Bond is...
(I’m not trying to be hyperbolic, but it’s a troubling scene no matter which way one wants to cut it).
I think most younger people have similar reactions watching it. At best whenever I've watched GF with friends that scene tends to prompt jokes like 'well, that's a hell of a way for Bond to get the police involved' or 'this is a me too moment waiting to happen' etc.
It's quite telling that it gets those sorts of gut reactions regardless of what one thinks of the scene.
I am not one for censorship of any kind, but this scene (how would you excise it, though?), the Pat Fearing one in TB, and the two (!) smacks of Tracy in OHMSS always take me out of these films in a very bad way.
Wait- what site am I on? I thought this was MI-6.... a Bond fan site that kinda liked Connery's films!
:P
Interesting point how these haven’t had censored releases yet, especially considering the original novels have, and they’re not as popular. In any case, it never does any good. Tons of copies out there with what happened, it won’t be forgotten.
"The barn "fight" is just the final physical representation of her giving over. She no longer just sees Bond as just another knuckle dragger. The music and comic build up to their kiss is supposed to clarify this.
Perhaps you don't have much life experience, but people are complex. If all you see in that scene is Bond "gives the girl the business . . . and she sees the light," then you are looking at the film with an overly simplistic eye. Pussy, like Bond, is a player who is quite aware of what her sexuality will get her, and she has navigated a world of killers and millionaires. She is not a child, nor is she helpless. She has demonstrated all through the film her capability, both physically and emotionally. There is nothing in her character that suggests she would allow Bond to have his way with her if she didn't want it.
If you wish to be uncomfortable, that is your choice, but a reasonable person would argue that it should come from what is actually there and not simply from what you choose to project onto it."
I like that quote.
In the case of TB, Patricia seemed attracted to Bond, but she had that 60's firewall of only sleeping with a man she loved. Bond suddenly saw the leverage he had there & used it so they could both enjoy themselves.
In the end, it's just fantasy anyway.
I don’t think anyone here said to burn the prints, nor any kind of censorship.
@chrisisall , who are you directing your “perhaps you don’t have much life experience” to? I think someone with life experience wouldn’t say such a thing to (mostly) strangers on a fan site?
And how is one being “unreasonable” with these scenes we are discussing? Your reading of them is not an absolute truth. You’re not bothered by it. Fine. But those, me included, can see these scenes as being problematic (and they are), but still appreciate the time it came out of (it still doesn’t make it “right”).
Yeah I was thinking that: it’s funny how we’re saying how bad it is when it is actually the one effective thing Bond does in the movie to stop Goldfinger’s plan! I guess he kills Oddjob too, but that’s about it.
It’s a shame that his one success is so dodgy!
Bit weird.
It was a quote, directed at someone else in 2016, and it resonated with me so I presented it here for the substance of it, not to direct it as a weaponization.
It’s already become more arthouse, it may as well go all in.
Get Won Kar Wai in.
To ME, Bond movies peaked with Timothy Dalton. A perfect blend of novel Bond & movie Bond.
We might never see such perfection again.