38 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

Well?

[Qwerty]

No, I think they're at a fine balance currently. (Although I think they didn't exactly get it right with making a female equal in Jinx)

[Dr. Tynan]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not being rude, but I don't mind political correctness. Well, not all of it. As I heard someone say once "We can't be racist." I agree. We can't call Chinese people chinks etc. I'm not saying you are Loomis , but I hate people who go on about how much they hate PC, not PC itself, well not all of it.

To be honest, I have not paid enough attention to the Brosnan ones to know, if they are or not.

I feel that the sexism in the earlier (Connery to Moore) Bonds was written to amuse the guys and written by people who liked to laugh at women (no offense women members and also sorry if that is wrong).

The sexism now in the Brosnan ones is (what might be called) contrived. They have it all figured out what to do to appear sexist and they "work at it." It's like they say to eachother, when writing the screenplay, "If we get Bond to say this, if we get him to say that, he'll appear sexist."

They want Bond fans to look and think "Oh brilliant, the Bonds are just as sexist as before." They want people to think, in a good way about them, "Those Bond writers are really sexist."

Do ya catch me drift.

[Turn]

Yeah, in a way they are. But not.

When they began, Bond films set a new trend, a guy with a license to kill that pushed the envelope on unique deaths and sex and wasn't averse to getting tough with the ladies. But as times changed, the series was surpassed by more daring things and it had to maintain its audience within certain parameters -- as in a PG or PG-13 rating (as we call it in the U.S.).

It's funny because Brosnan has said he'd like a harder edge as far as sex and violence goes, but he says he won't smoke because it may be a bad thing coming from a role model. Instead of a cigarette after cavorting with Jinx, they're munching on fruit.

The series is in a pretty tough position. It has an audience to please, but can't go too far as far as malicious violence or gratutitous sex. It may bring in a few different audience members, but would more likely lose many more of the other audience members as a result. I remember a friend of mine who is the opposite of a prude acting like he was offended with the slight bare breast of Pushkin's girlfriend in TLD. I think in retrospect he just didn't like the Dalton era, but it was his loss. But he made a big deal about that.

You can't bring a lot of the Fleming elements because there's box office to be had. But at the same time, Bond isn't necessarily a charcter you're supposed to necessarily like. He's a guy using everything he's got to save the world or whatever is at stake. If that means he wants to smoke, drink and go through as many people as he has to, do it.

[Tarl_Cabot]

In a word, yes.

Changes:

Replace Brosnan. I think he's a part of the problem. As Turn pointed out, he wants to be the Tarantino Bond and have harder scenes of sex and violence but he refuses to smoke on camera as it is, for him, irresponisible for him to encourage the youth of the world to smoke as a means of aquiring coolness. Pick a style and stick to it,Mr. Brosnan! This is a huge contridiction...Bond is pure fantasy. Let him have his vices. I also think it's time for a change anyway. A new actor can revive the series the way Dalton did after Moore and Brosnan did after the 6 year deep freeze...

Female co-stars:
I consider Pam Bouvier the perfect Bond girl for the modern world if we must have a PC Bond girl. She is capable, confident and brave but she never stops being a woman. She (Cary Lowel) never presumes to be Bond's equal.

Also, hire unknowns. No more barbaric miss-castings like Denise Richards as nuclear scientists just to cash in on Maxim pin up popularity.

Writers:
Dump these hacks who have given us the two worst Bond films of them all in consecutive entrys-a third awful outing, no matter how profitable, is not acceptable.

Rating:

I agree with Brosnan that Bond should be R rated again(I just think he should still smoke). I say, again because the series used to be considered on the cutting edge in the 60's so they were like R rated. Bond is too tame now. More sensuality and grittiness. A Kill Bill Vol 2 type Bond, with all the stops pulled would be fascinating...

Director: Obviously, I want Tarantino.

[PrinceKamalKhan]

Female co-stars:
I consider Pam Bouvier the perfect Bond girl for the modern world if we must have a PC Bond girl. She is capable, confident and brave but she never stops being a woman. She (Cary Lowel) never presumes to be Bond's equal.

Really? While Carey Lowell herself is certainly cute, I've never particularly cared for Pam's inconsistent personality. She starts out acting more like a Mel Gibson Lethal Weapon girl than a Bond girl at first and then as LTK progresses, gets all whiny and jealous when Bond doesn't pay enough attention to her later on. What is she? A "tough-as-nails" CIA pilot or a whiny, unsophisticated high school girl with her first crush? In at least one way, she's more PC than her successors, i.e. unlike Jinx, Natalya, Elektra, Christmas and even the much ballyhooed Wai Lin, Pam never gets captured or has to be rescued by Bond. In fact more often than not, Pam saves Bond in LTK.

I think a better model for a modern Bond girl would be a female character written like Domino Derval, Melina Havelock, or Elektra(prior to her being revealed as a villainess). Exotic, intelligent, brave, sophisticated, vulnerable, feminine, one who complements Bond rather than acts exactly like him. After all, if the lead Bond girl is exactly like Bond, then 1 of the 2 of them is unnecessary.

As for the main question, yes the modern Bond films are too politically correct. Fleming wrote Bond as a womanizing, chain-smoking assassin and therefore, probably not a "nice person". Nothing against "nice" people but if I want to watch "nice" I'll watch Mr. Rogers, not 007.

[SnakeEyes]

Bond isn't a nice person. But how many of us want to be Bond (real Bond)...people are just not nice

Is Bond too PC now. Probably. But only in certain areas. The women, for example are very very annoying now they are going over the top with 'equality'. It's not equality at all. It's sexism towards Bond. They stand him up, call him names and all have a giggle whilst he looks like he's trying to down play embarasment that these people even have jobs near him. Moneypenny and M are classic examples of this. What annoying dykes. Same goes for that silly Jinx slapper. Go back to the street corner you came from honey, you're just not a spy.

[1q2w3e4r]

Yes, Bond was and should be as he was in Connery's films and Fleming's novels.

[Qwerty]

Is Bond too PC now. Probably. But only in certain areas. The women, for example are very very annoying now they are going over the top with 'equality'. It's not equality at all. It's sexism towards Bond. They stand him up, call him names and all have a giggle whilst he looks like he's trying to down play embarasment that these people even have jobs near him. Moneypenny and M are classic examples of this. What annoying dykes. Same goes for that silly Jinx slapper. Go back to the street corner you came from honey, you're just not a spy.

I think they're trying too hard to make a female Bond recently. While I think at least that it worked alright with Wai Lin, because it seemed to go overboard with Jinx, I think that detracted more from her character rather than added to it.

[Brian Flagg]

Bond is definitely "too" politically correct. The fact that they have M and MP dumping on him every film (and taking up too damn much screen time, to boot!)
seems to be an apology for the sexism and misogyny of the early films. As the women are getting revenge. While having this feminist uprising against 007, they don't even allow Bond to actually be the character without the consequences. He ends up coming across like Benny Hill in a naughty schoolboy sketch.

Two things could have happened: Either have Bond remain as he was and let the character exist on his own terms (letting the audience "come to him", so to speak) or continue as the producers have done during the Brosnan era, which is to kowtow to the "sensitive" elements of the audience and sacrifice what made the character so entertaining to begin with. They chose the latter. I for one, like a little sexism with my 007--the ladykiller fantasy element is part of Bond's appeal, and by incorporating all of these "modern" and "sensitive" aspects, not to Bond; but to the women around him they have taken Bond from his (and our) fantasy world and brought him into a PC world that many of us dislike.

Oh, and let him smoke! Pierce is just about through with his less-than-spectacular ten years at the helm, so when they boot his keister off the throne, maybe some of what made Bond great will return.

There, I ended on an optimistic note!

[Turn]

Bond isn't a nice person. But how many of us want to be Bond (real Bond)...people are just not nice

I think this is why Dalton's Bond was never really accepted as much as it could have been. He was portraying a man who wasn't the lighter Bond Moore portrayed. As much as I love Roger's Bond and his films, let's face it, he doesn't seem like the blunt instrument of the British government described in the novels.

[Qwerty]

Bond isn't a nice person. But how many of us want to be Bond (real Bond)...people are just not nice

I think this is why Dalton's Bond was never really accepted as much as it could have been. He was portraying a man who wasn't the lighter Bond Moore portrayed. As much as I love Roger's Bond and his films, let's face it, he doesn't seem like the blunt instrument of the British government described in the novels.

Roger has the class and sophistication of the Bond in the novels, while admittingly, Dalton and Connery were tougher in their portrayal. Although Roger has those scenes too.

[Turn]

Roger has the class and sophistication of the Bond in the novels, while admittingly, Dalton and Connery were tougher in their portrayal. Although Roger has those scenes too.

True. But my point most of us got interested in Bond because of his job as a man with a license to kill, a deadly avenger against the forces of evil. The class and sophistication are an added ingredient to make his character more distinctive. Dalton played up the job aspect in his portrayal while Roger chose the lighter aspects to focus on.

[Qwerty]

Roger has the class and sophistication of the Bond in the novels, while admittingly, Dalton and Connery were tougher in their portrayal. Although Roger has those scenes too.

True. But my point most of us got interested in Bond because of his job as a man with a license to kill, a deadly avenger against the forces of evil. The class and sophistication are an added ingredient to make his character more distinctive. Dalton played up the job aspect in his portrayal while Roger chose the lighter aspects to focus on.

I can see your point there, but I think all of those aspects play an equal part.

[Atticus17F]

I think they're trying too hard to make a female Bond recently. While I think at least that it worked alright with Wai Lin, because it seemed to go overboard with Jinx, I think that detracted more from her character rather than added to it.

I quite agree, Qwerty. Though it's not the concept of a "female Bond" I have a problem with, it's the fact that none of the women billed as such have been remotely believable as the kind of person James Bond would be interested in.

The most memorable Bond girls were, to some degree, refined and sophisticated. They fit in Bond's world. What on earth would James Bond see in some vulgar, annoying hag like Jinx or Christmas Jones? I mean, where's the class?

[Qwerty]

I think they're trying too hard to make a female Bond recently. While I think at least that it worked alright with Wai Lin, because it seemed to go overboard with Jinx, I think that detracted more from her character rather than added to it.

I quite agree, Qwerty. Though it's not the concept of a "female Bond" I have a problem with, it's the fact that none of the women billed as such have been remotely believable as the kind of person James Bond would be interested in.

The most memorable Bond girls were, to some degree, refined and sophisticated. They fit in Bond's world. What on earth would James Bond see in some vulgar, annoying hag like Jinx or Christmas Jones? I mean, where's the class?

Indeed, it's not the idea that's so bad, but the execution of it. If they're going to make these female leads like so, make them credible. I don't mind Christmas Jones as much as Jinx because Christmas is the regular Bond girl, and not trying to be something that she always is. Whereas for Jinx, the idea of an equal is fine, but it doesn't come off as close. (I think)

[Loomis]

[quote name='Brian Flagg' date='15 June 2004 - 15:35'] Bond is definitely "too" politically correct.

[Brian Flagg]

Wow, Brian, I find myself agreeing so much with your posts that I've started to wonder whether you might be my alter-ego during sleepwalking hours (or whether I might be yours).

Still, I do think DIE ANOTHER DAY is markedly less PC than the other Brosnans. Is George W. Bush commonly viewed as PC? Didn't think so. Well, the political world view that DAD seems to push could have come straight from Dubya: North Korea and Cuba, bad - decaying states swarming with terrorists dealing in WMD and up to all manner of funny business.... irredeemably evil places. China (also a Communist dictatorship, yet apparently no longer an enemy but instead a "strategic competitor"), good, and doing a splendid job of running Hong Kong. America and Britain, the best - policing the planet together.

And is the famous Moneypenny scene at the end particularly PC? I have my doubts. Wouldn't PCness have called for Bond to be fantasising about Moneypenny instead, only to be humiliated by her flipping the bird at him?

And don't forget those Cuban cigars. Or the sickmakingly tokenistic role of Charles Robinson - which is surely something that goes against everything PCness is supposed to stand for.

Hey, this is a message board! We're not supposed to agree!

Loomis, you make some valid points about some of the headway that DAD made in terms of "bringing back" some of the vintage Bond attitude, but I was referring to the Brosnan era as a whole rather than the exceptions. I've made pretty clear how I feel about the Brosnan run of films, and I can't wait for him to be done with the series. I feel a new Bond is necessary, but more importantly, a new stable of writers. Preferably writers not afraid to take some chances. At the risk of repeating myself, I'll say once again that they should just let Bond be Bond and to let the audience accept Bond for what he is, rather than try and re-invent him, all the while profusely apologizing and wringing their hands over who might be offended.

[Loomis]

At the risk of repeating myself, I'll say once again that they should just let Bond be Bond and to let the audience accept Bond for what he is, rather than try and re-invent him, all the while profusely apologizing and wringing their hands over who might be offended.

At the risk of seeming uncontroversial, I heartily agree!

[Seannery]

Yes!!!

[SnakeEyes]

If they are offended, don't watch it.

It's that simple, but someone who wants to make a 'big deal' over reclaming some false ideals and standards for 'the people' never let it be that simple.

Ahh, I hate 'people'.

[Brian Flagg]

If they are offended, don't watch it.

It's that simple, but someone who wants to make a 'big deal' over reclaming some false ideals and standards for 'the people' never let it be that simple.

Ahh, I hate 'people'.

Snakeyes, I like your style!

Unfortunately many people are sanctimonious and project their (often false) ideals on others. I really believe that some people actually like being offended! It gives them something to scream about and then they get the attention they so obviously crave. One of the many downsides of living in a "Nanny" society...

[Qwerty]

It's that simple, but someone who wants to make a 'big deal' over reclaming some false ideals and standards for 'the people' never let it be that simple.

That happens quite often too.

[Glor (009)]

Brosnan doesn't want his Bond to smoke? He smokes a lot of cigars for someone who doesn't want people to smoke. I even have a copy of Cigar Afficionado with him on the cover.

Bond has definitely become too PC but it didn't happen overnight. Think Stacey Sutton. Connery would have decked her and carried her out of the burning building over his shoulder. May Day saves the mine by going back in and sacrificing herself. Now we have Jinx and Wai Lin and Moneypenny's "witty" repartie with Bond while she secretly wants him. The main thing that bothers me is that we don't need to see a woman as Bond's equal or anyone else as his equal. There is no other and no one should forget that.

When it comes to Christmas Jones the phrase "I'll buy you an ice cream" comes to mind. Although having Bond bed a woman 20 years his junior is decidedly un-pc so I guess it should be kudos.

[Harmsway]

The Brosnan films just aren't harsh enough. Yeah, you heard me. They're not brutal like they used to be. The hard edge is gone - only GE had something close. Where's the brutality in Bond's personality? I want to see a Bond that'll interrogate a man and blow his kneecaps off if he's not getting what he wants. Sure it's extremely rough - but it's how my vision of Bond works. Brosnan's Bond just doesn't have the "to hell with it" attitude that I like my Bond to have.

Connery's Bond had it down. He was brutal and rough - watch him shoot Dent in DN or strangle Marie with her bikini in DAF. That's tough and that's harsh. Brosnan wouldn't do it, and it's a pity. I want my Bond to be be able to slap a bitch around. Heck, even Moore got into some of it in LALD and TMWTGG.

[Tarl_Cabot]

LOL

[Harmsway]

Okay, well maybe blowing out the kneecap is a little TOO harsh. But you get the idea.

[Glor (009)]

It is kind of sad that even the spys on Alias are more brutal than Bond these days. In one of the last episodes Vaughn (the good guy) poured acid on a guy's leg to get him to talk.

[Qwerty]

It is kind of sad that even the spys on Alias are more brutal than Bond these days. In one of the last episodes Vaughn (the good guy) poured acid on a guy's leg to get him to talk.

However in that epsiode, ABC had their TV 14, DSLV etc. cautions on all throughout the episode.

They're always trying in some ways to keep Bond "family" style.

[Qwerty]

Just as a reply though, I think Christmas Jones is one the examples where the stay tough, but stay feminine style worked.