So was Mr. Henderson...?
Started by
FireKiss
, Apr 10 2003 08:38 PM
10 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 10 April 2003 - 08:38 PM
That bit where he says that "Yes I get it from the doorman at the Russian embassy...amongst certain other things" (muttered). That last remark is just so suggestive and guardedly said, it smacks so much of unusual secretive behaviour, possibly of a sexual nature.
#2
Posted 10 April 2003 - 10:27 PM
That's one possibility. But since Henderson is a spy, I would guess he's referring to state secrets. The character in the novel is certainly not gay, and I haven't seen the producers create any gay characters. The ones who were in the novels had that trait de-emphasized.
The only way to know is to ask Charles Gray his interpretation, but I don't think the film supports it.
The only way to know is to ask Charles Gray his interpretation, but I don't think the film supports it.
#3
Posted 10 April 2003 - 10:35 PM
I always thought he was getting some hookers or something. Henderson had that wooden leg, so you never know, right?
#4
Posted 10 April 2003 - 10:37 PM
He could be getting so many things from the doorman at the Russian embassy, I think using the doorman for sexual encounters is the least likely of those possibilities.
#5
Posted 10 April 2003 - 10:40 PM
I'm sorry, I must have been eating too many green M&Ms.
#6
Posted 10 April 2003 - 11:10 PM
I'm with FireKiss on this one.
Regarding Henderson in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, I posted the following on another thread:
As played by Charles Gray, the effete English expatriate makes Wint and Kidd look like Liam and Noel Gallagher on a stag night. For me, Henderson steals the movie even though he only appears in one scene. Clad in a kimono, he receives Bond (who looks increasingly uncomfortable the longer he remains in Henderson's presence) in his bedroom, which boasts an enormous, very out-of-place-looking four-poster bed as well as hanging scrolls, shoji screens and tatami mats. "You'll have to forgive this rather odd mixture of styles," Henderson drawls in a manner Noel Coward would have envied, "but I refuse to go entirely Japanese." As an afterthought, he murmurs: "I'm very fond of some of these old things." When Bond compliments him on the vodka he has managed to obtain, Henderson says suggestively: "I get it from the doorman at the Russian embassy, among certain other things." Superb.
I'd say that it is heavily implied that Henderson is gay. That may or may not have been the filmmakers' intention, and perhaps I have read too much into the Henderson scene, but I do think that questioning his sexual orientation is understandable.
However, the Henderson of Fleming's novel is not an effeminate, artys-fartsy Englishman who seems something of a delicate creature, but a very different character, a rough, tough, beer-swilling, ultra-macho Aussie (is there any other kind?) who swears like a trooper. Did the filmmakers deliberately make the screen Henderson more or less the polar opposite of the literary Henderson as some kind of joke aimed at viewers who had read the novel?
While we're on the subject of YOLT, some regard it as a goof when Henderson gives Bond a stirred-not-shaken Vodka martini and asks him if he's got it right, and 007 doesn't contradict him. As I see it, it's definitely not a goof - even more amusing than the fact that Henderson gets is wrong is the fact that Bond decides to play by the rules of politeness observed by upper class English society, which dictate that it would be terribly bad form for him to do anything other than agree that his favourite tipple had been prepared perfectly by his host. *Sigh* If only the jokes in the current Bond films were as subtle. Nowadays it's all crude quips about being a cunning linguist and knowing where to put cigars.
Regarding Henderson in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, I posted the following on another thread:
As played by Charles Gray, the effete English expatriate makes Wint and Kidd look like Liam and Noel Gallagher on a stag night. For me, Henderson steals the movie even though he only appears in one scene. Clad in a kimono, he receives Bond (who looks increasingly uncomfortable the longer he remains in Henderson's presence) in his bedroom, which boasts an enormous, very out-of-place-looking four-poster bed as well as hanging scrolls, shoji screens and tatami mats. "You'll have to forgive this rather odd mixture of styles," Henderson drawls in a manner Noel Coward would have envied, "but I refuse to go entirely Japanese." As an afterthought, he murmurs: "I'm very fond of some of these old things." When Bond compliments him on the vodka he has managed to obtain, Henderson says suggestively: "I get it from the doorman at the Russian embassy, among certain other things." Superb.
I'd say that it is heavily implied that Henderson is gay. That may or may not have been the filmmakers' intention, and perhaps I have read too much into the Henderson scene, but I do think that questioning his sexual orientation is understandable.
However, the Henderson of Fleming's novel is not an effeminate, artys-fartsy Englishman who seems something of a delicate creature, but a very different character, a rough, tough, beer-swilling, ultra-macho Aussie (is there any other kind?) who swears like a trooper. Did the filmmakers deliberately make the screen Henderson more or less the polar opposite of the literary Henderson as some kind of joke aimed at viewers who had read the novel?
While we're on the subject of YOLT, some regard it as a goof when Henderson gives Bond a stirred-not-shaken Vodka martini and asks him if he's got it right, and 007 doesn't contradict him. As I see it, it's definitely not a goof - even more amusing than the fact that Henderson gets is wrong is the fact that Bond decides to play by the rules of politeness observed by upper class English society, which dictate that it would be terribly bad form for him to do anything other than agree that his favourite tipple had been prepared perfectly by his host. *Sigh* If only the jokes in the current Bond films were as subtle. Nowadays it's all crude quips about being a cunning linguist and knowing where to put cigars.
#7
Posted 11 April 2003 - 02:05 AM
IMO, Henderson had such a small role, that to make him gay would be controversial in 1967, and it would serve no purpose. The only suggestive line would be the one about getting, "other things" from the doorman. But Henderson is a spy, what kind of things does a spy get from the doorman at a Russian embassy? I just think that Henderson was a upper-class Englishman living in Japan.
#8
Posted 11 April 2003 - 04:43 PM
"...among certain other things"
I've always laughed at this line when watching YOLT, but I've never taken it to suggest homosexuality. I don't think that's what the script writer was trying to imply at all.
I've always laughed at this line when watching YOLT, but I've never taken it to suggest homosexuality. I don't think that's what the script writer was trying to imply at all.
#9
Posted 11 April 2003 - 05:16 PM
This is a toughie. If Henderson were referring to a female and
said "I get it from HER among other things" delivering the line exactly
the way Charles Gray did I think sexual favors would be MORE than implied. Perhaps it's simply Gray's delivery that makes the sexual implication when the screenwriters were thinking more in terms of
information.
said "I get it from HER among other things" delivering the line exactly
the way Charles Gray did I think sexual favors would be MORE than implied. Perhaps it's simply Gray's delivery that makes the sexual implication when the screenwriters were thinking more in terms of
information.
#10
Posted 11 April 2003 - 06:31 PM
Hmm, taking into account the point Loomis made, it could be a possibility that Henderson was gay. The only other point that could be made is the way he looked at Bond when he opens the door, and the oh-so-camp way he says "do come in". My reckoning though is that he isn't gay, as someone pointed out before-he's probably just an upper class English gentleman.
#11
Posted 12 April 2003 - 08:04 PM
You might find that a bit awkward, as Gray died about two years ago.Originally posted by Peter
The only way to know is to ask Charles Gray his interpretation, but I don't think the film supports it.