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
:))
I thought you said that you'd have no problem with it whatsoever, but looking at it now I think you meant in other movies, my mistake :)
1) Some say this is proof that Barbara Broccoli tries hard to appeal to a more feminist and / or PC audience.
I choose to disagree - or at least to see things not in a negative light. We saw Connery's chest occasionally as well. That was several decades ago. Babs had nothing to say about Bond then. PC? If a bare chest is PC, then the word has been given a perhaps too broad meaning.
2) Some say Craig's bare chest indicates a too muscular Bond.
Bonds have come in all types. Some have been average, in a minor few occasions the chest was perhaps a bit 'saggy' and in Craig's case the chest seems to have been well-trained. Still, he's not ready to go three rounds against a pro wrestler. I honestly don't think Craig's muscular chest is too much of the good stuff. We don't need Mr Universe Arnold Schwarzenegger, obviously, but Craig is far from there. Let's not overemphasize the extra tissue, boys. ;-)
3) Fleming's Bond is often mentioned as being naked.
And indeed, we frequently have to imagine a shirtless Bond in the novels. True, imagining a topless Bond isn't the same as seeing a topless Bond, but in spirit, a shirtless Bond is very close to Fleming - as would be a completely naked Bond by the way (which I wouldn't want to see.)
4) Craig's Bond isn't nude above the waist ALL THE TIME.
Besides the casual love making scene, when most of the Bonds take off their clothes in part or in full, we see Craig shirtless perhaps twice at most in each of his films. Twice, not ten times or even five times. Two red peppers in a giant bowl of soup do not make the meal spicy.
Let's be serious and say it is blatantly obvious that Craig gets a lot of attention to his physique, or half dressed incidents, since he made his debut, which was never so apparent in previous Bond actors
Fair enough, there will be sections of the general audience, that need no elaboration, who will appreciate such a thing or applaud, but I just find it all unnecessary above all else
It's not envy, it's just something that doesn't need saturation coverage more often than not. If I want to see physiques, I'll go attend a Mr Olympia show, but it's not something that needs to be included for James Bond
Maybe someone even suggested Schwarzenegger for Bond, in their wisdom, at some previous point in time, but we don't need focus on the actors physique, such as we have here. Flemings original character was never like this, and the author has a point when he thinks there is too much focus on Craig's body since his arrival
I'd ask them to cut it out, but what's the use. Nothing will get done. Once again, something completely unnecessary from this perspective
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/01/29/statues.htm
Yes... well, the question was what's the problem with shortless Daniel Craig and my answer was there was indeed no problem. I meant that in general - in whatever movies in fact. As for Bond, he already was, in CR, so.
The full frontal issue was a different matter - I have no problem with that, either, but obviously it's not something we'd see in a Bond movie - we merely see him being brutally tortured within an inch of his life, that's all ok, apparently. I was not, however, suggesting there should be full frontal nudity in Bond, and echo just explained it was a joke, so nobody was suggesting it for Bond.
In general I don't see what's the fuss with nudity in movies anyway, maybe I'm too European to get the problem. Anyway, it also seems to me that many people who are against male nudity (full or partial) have no problem with female nudity (full or partial), which is... interesting.
Haha, But I believe he has! If you take note of FRWL, it appears that Bond may have had a Ménage à trois with the two gypsy girls he gets the pick of for saving the camp.
I didn't understand what your problem there is exactly. Most of the time the guy is still fully dressed (most often in a suit), and like was already pointed out before he's not showing skin in situations where it wouldn't be appropriate. Most of those scenes are also pretty short, sometimes just seconds. Why do you find them offensive or unpleasant? You didn't mention if you feel the same way about the women - should they also be fully covered from head to toe like Bond is most of the time? A lot of Bond's work is actually very physical, and he needs to be fit to be able to do it. Some focus on that is therefore not out of place IMO, but only natural. Yet, when he's fighting on top of a train or running in the streets and underground of London, he's doing it in a suit, not in his underwear.
He sleeps with enough women I think (just one or two girls per film is enough for me), but I think it'd be nice if one of them could survive for a change.
But...but...BUT...if we complain enough then the women will see that they're wrong to find Craig attractive and then they'll want to sleep with us instead! Trust me, THIS WILL WORK!!! And it will be so much easier than exercising and making ourselves more attractive instead!
;-)
Meh, disagree and I'm in great shape.
Well maybe write one that doesn't need to die to move the plot forward? I'm not sure all of them had to die either. Vesper obviously had to die and Severine's death made an impact, made Silva seem evil and set up a nice one liner.
Fields I suppose you could say had to die because of the whole Bond/M trust thing, but what about Solange? She could've easily survived.
To be fair his shag piece in Turkey (the Greek girl, I'm forgetting the name now) survived. But she didn't have a single line and overall probably had less than a minute of screentime.
So that seems to be the unwritten rule for the Craig films- If Bond speaks to the girl and has sex with her, she dies :P
It'd be nice if that rule was broken in the next one.
Oh yeah, and as a healthy man I definitely vote for bare breasts of any variety, Bond girls included :)
I'm an American, and free spirited in a European sense when it comes to sex and nudity. I'm not judgmental, to each his/her own within reason. In this case, it's a collection of uptight knuckleheads who can't reason with the very simple fact that the breast is functioning in a non sexual context. My children saw these things in a doctor's office and it didn't scar them for life, they easily understood it was only a mother feeding her child. Meanwhile, we've got people who think any gun, including assault weapons, should be legal to possess even in the face of mass deaths of innocents.
Fair enough but in my defence, I did day some people as opposed to all the people that dont approve of Craig showing of his body and I personally know a few people who arent in the best of shape and feel threatened but I suppose that's their problem. I for one was fat, unfit and quite the lazy bastard but once I saw the trailer to CR, I underwent a complete lifestyle change abd have been in top physical condition ever since.
Fair enough and fair play to you mate.
Why exactly is it distracting? I guess Connery shirtless in the first Bond films was a lot more distracting because it was less usual for actors to appear bare chested in those days.
BTW in the next movie I think Dan should rip one man's spine out with his bare hands and stab another guy in the face with it.
I can think of lots more colorful terms, which would you prefer? :)