Dirty Benny's Weekly Rant

[Kristatos]

Well, some of the older Bond films are a little uncomfortable to watch nowadays. Goldfinger and Thunderball are a bit rapey, and the kindest thing I can say about LALD is that it's not as racist as the novel. But at least those films have the excuse of having been made in a different era. What's the excuse for Bond's treatment of Severine in Skyfall?

[Veronica]

Well, some of the older Bond films are a little uncomfortable to watch nowadays. Goldfinger and Thunderball are a bit rapey, and the kindest thing I can say about LALD is that it's not as racist as the novel. But at least those films have the excuse of having been made in a different era. What's the excuse for Bond's treatment of Severine in Skyfall?

Oh,yeah,Severine.First he tells how she was a child sex slave but then basically corners her in the shower.And then later,while he has a gun in his hands he doesn't kill Silva and the goons...oh,right,the movie needs to last at least an hour so that won't happen because end-credits would need to role.And when Silva kills Severine he comments on "waste of good scotch"..oh,so now he knows fine drinks,right?Because in CR he didn't give a d**n.Bond previously may killed a guy and said a one-liner but never a Bond girl died while Bond was standing near her with a gun...good lord.And then someone comments on Bond blackmailing a nurse in Thunderball.Personally I found that to be more of a joke... I don't think he really meant it...

[Omega]

Well, some of the older Bond films are a little uncomfortable to watch nowadays. Goldfinger and Thunderball are a bit rapey, and the kindest thing I can say about LALD is that it's not as racist as the novel. But at least those films have the excuse of having been made in a different era. What's the excuse for Bond's treatment of Severine in Skyfall?

I think it was suppose to a artistic statement on how bond treated women in past movies and I guess how he's becoming a cold Bas***d as mommy m said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Veronica]

Craig basically cornered ex-sex slave in the shower but then feminist Babs averaged that out by making Bond gay...and she is constantly going on with her catchphrases like "This time we are going back to Fleming"..and so on.

[dirtybenny]

That's what makes her over use of the phrase "Going back to Fleming" so ridiculous. Look I realize she owns the rights to the character and therefore can do with him whatever she likes, including turning him in to a bisexual, if that's what she wants. But to try and rationalize that by saying it's a nod to Fleming is absolutely insane!

To say Fleming was homophobic is an understatement, one only need read a few paragraphs of one, any one, of his novels to know that! Even in EON's own biographical film, Everything or Nothing, they feature a clip of Ian himself stating his books are for "Red blooded HETEROSEXUAL men, not for school boys".

So to claim Bond hinting at sexual experimentation is anything other than their own invention is an absolute lie!

[Kristatos]

Fleming's homophobia is sometimes overstated - he was friends with Noel Coward, after all. And it's by no means certain that Bond is bisexual. The consensus on that scene between Silva and Bond is that Silva was trying to freak out the famously heterosexual Bond, and that Bond was bullshitting in order to regain the upper hand. An alternative explanation is that he may not have had a choice - I mean, he did go to Eton....

[dirtybenny]

We could debate the level of Fleming's homophobia, but it's certain he was to some degree, especially where Bond is concerned, but I think your missing my overall point, whether or not that scene is meant to convey bisexuality or so kind of psyich out by Bond to Silva, it is full of homoerotic subtext which in my opinion at least, is nowhere near "going back to Fleming" as Babzy's cohorts contend.

[Veronica]

We could debate the level of Fleming's homophobia, but it's certain he was to some degree, especially where Bond is concerned, but I think your missing my overall point, whether or not that scene is meant to convey bisexuality or so kind of psyich out by Bond to Silva, it is full of homoerotic subtext which in my opinion at least, is nowhere near "going back to Fleming" as Babzy's cohorts contend.

Exactly.I mean when that scene came up I raised my eyebrows more than Roger Moore and wanted to stop watching the movie right then-just like I did when that scene "I don't give a d**n" in CR came up but I somehow watched the rest...
"Going back to Fleming" is her favourite "excuse" why Craig is playing Bond...she just wants us to buy that crap-because people will buy that more easily because A) while everybody watched at least one or two Bond movies much less people read the books(or one of them) and B) everybody can see Craig is nothing like "movie" Bond...casual movie-goer may not particulary care that now Craig is playing Bond but ask a casual movie-goer who is James Bond and I bet he/she will not say something that would describe Daniel Craig's Bond.The polls on general forum in my country prove that.Craig at best ends up 3rd in a poll and he is helped by the fact he is the current one while Connery and Brosnan are always first and second respectively.When not,he is 4th and Moore is 3rd.We also need to take into consideration that many youngsters who maybe don't even know other Bonds and watched only Craig will vote for Craig then.I got awfully iritated when I read crappy articles like "Has Craig surpassed Connery as Bond?"(HA!YEAH,RIGHT!) so I read what general people thought-and well...Craig is not the second coming of Connery no matter what "The Guardian"(payed??) is writing or what Craig fans are instisting.

[dirtybenny]

I think you may be on to something there Veronica, since fewer people have read the novels they would be more apt to believe anything they're told is "Flemingesque", couple that with peoples assumption that a more subdued and melodramatic plot would be more "book like" and EON can claim anything they want, because who's going to put them in check.

[Veronica]

I think you may be on to something there Veronica, since fewer people have read the novels they would be more apt to believe anything they're told is "Flemingesque", couple that with peoples assumption that a more subdued and melodramatic plot would be more "book like" and EON can claim anything they want, because who's going to put them in check.

Exactly. In the books it's much much easier to make characters more complexed with "shades of grey" and all that while that's much more difficult when doing movies. I am not of course saying these Craig movies are more complexed but they are propaganded as "different,controversial" and most of all "character driven" and there are words everywhere like "dark" and "gritty" and there you have it. It's easy then to pull people on the ship called "more complexed Bond" since I've already read stuff like:"The character of James Bond is so superficial" and "the plot of the movie is not deep enough" since when is Bond supposed to be FREACKING DOSTOYEVSKY?!

[commander0077again]

The worlds of the novels and the films are of course very different. But the underlying glue is the character of Bond. While his screen side was much more bigger than life, we still retain the basic character of the Bond of the books as a straightforward man, with only a few books in his bookshelf (Scarne on Cards, I recall is one of them), kind to his housekepper May, and usually a gentleman to people who need rescuing. There is little of Bond's sardonic take on life in the Babolicious 'epics.' The books and films were unique in creating a parallel universe that was fun to visit. I wouldn't want to visit Bab's 'Flemingnisque' world, where nothing is colorful, everying is grey and Bourne-ing. Bourne actually does it better.

[dirtybenny]

I wouldn't want to visit Bab's 'Flemingnisque' world, where nothing is colorful, everying is grey and Bourne-ing.

You can also add nothing is Fleming as well, Commander!

[Veronica]

The worlds of the novels and the films are of course very different. But the underlying glue is the character of Bond. While his screen side was much more bigger than life, we still retain the basic character of the Bond of the books as a straightforward man, with only a few books in his bookshelf (Scarne on Cards, I recall is one of them), kind to his housekepper May, and usually a gentleman to people who need rescuing. There is little of Bond's sardonic take on life in the Babolicious 'epics.' The books and films were unique in creating a parallel universe that was fun to visit. I wouldn't want to visit Bab's 'Flemingnisque' world, where nothing is colorful, everying is grey and Bourne-ing. Bourne actually does it better.

I read once that the next theme song should be called "Nobody does it worse".. that's true.
Bond in the books had a range of emotions appropriate for a situation while with Craig they made him depressed all the time...for no apparent reason.

[Veronica]

Hey,Benny,I remembered you once wrote a comment about three groups of movie stars:"icons","actors" and "stars".I think you are right about your classification and explanation of course but you said there are no icons today.Well,it took me a while to remember one:Johnny Depp.
Let's face it we all love Johnny but not because he's a great actor.We love him because he's Johnny Depp.

That being said are you going to post any rent soon?

[dirtybenny]

Rent! I didn't realize you were my land lord!

Yeah I've got a couple milling around in my head, just got to make time to put pen to paper as it were.

And you're right about Depp he does fit the icon category nicely.

[dirtybenny]

Here are a couple of titles to wet your appetite.

"Bond Themes"

The Teaser Poster

Brosnan and Craig two sides of the same coin

Don't judge that last one till you read it!

[Omega]

Starting the chant
"
Rant, rant, rant !"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kristatos]

And you're right about Depp he does fit the icon category nicely.

Which is kind of ironic. When he was first cast as CAPTAIN Jack Sparrow, he was very much in the "actor" category. Keira Knightley, on her DVD commentary for the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie, expressed surprise that Johnny Depp would do a big summer blockbuster! People were talking about how on the first day of the shoot, he went into his trailer with the costume and makeup people to get into character, and how what emerged was like nothing they'd ever seen before. Nowadays, he's Johnny Depp, the wacky novelty act, with every role being a variation on Captain Jack.

(Sorry I've been offline for the last couple of days, btw - been having internet connection problems.)

[Veronica]

Rent! I didn't realize you were my land lord!

Yeah I've got a couple milling around in my head, just got to make time to put pen to paper as it were.

And you're right about Depp he does fit the icon category nicely.

yeah I meant rant. Hah.

[Veronica]

And you're right about Depp he does fit the icon category nicely.

Which is kind of ironic. When he was first cast as CAPTAIN Jack Sparrow, he was very much in the "actor" category. Keira Knightley, on her DVD commentary for the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie, expressed surprise that Johnny Depp would do a big summer blockbuster! People were talking about how on the first day of the shoot, he went into his trailer with the costume and makeup people to get into character, and how what emerged was like nothing they'd ever seen before. Nowadays, he's Johnny Depp, the wacky novelty act, with every role being a variation on Captain Jack.

(Sorry I've been offline for the last couple of days, btw - been having internet connection problems.)

Yeah,you can hear similar thing in "Honest trailers:POC" "From the most interesting actor to stereotyping..." or something like that. And plus I read his last five movies flopped(one of them being Mortecai where he is very much playing a variation on Captain Jack) but we can expect a hit with the new POC movies that is coming out in 2017. But the truth is that the first one was by far the best. I don't know if the fifth one is going to continue in that tone as well.