41 replies to this topic

[x 440Magnum x]

My perusings of the internet found this, so I thought I'd bring it here.

http://www.abc4.com/...F0-DB8BB8D1BB90

I think full frontal nudity and homosexual scenes are not characteristic of James Bond movies. Casino Royale was on the line of what defines a true Bond movie for me....and I think it might slip off my radar which much more in the way of deviations. Nothing against homosexuals...but he's defined in part by his flings with women..

What do you think?

[iexpectu2die]

Isn't he saying here that he doesn't want a homosexual scene?

[Johnboy007]

I think this is a giant load of .

[x 440Magnum x]

Don't shoot the messenger... I've been a Bond fan since I was a little kid, and I searched the forums and didn't find anything like this. Thanks, on deleting the second part.

Another thing to note is that a lot of the darker British humor is considerably...off-beat. I don't know anything about Dr. Who, but I really don't think this would fly for a Bond movie.

The only thing that gets me is I couldn't find another source for this article, so who knows.

Edited by x 440Magnum x, 30 November 2006 - 08:59 PM.

[Bondian]

I doubt if it would ever happen. But if it did, it wold have to be done so well that it didn't turn us warm blooded lesbians off of watching these movies.

Joking aside. There's absolutely no call for Bond to sleep with another man, or for that matter having scenes of homosexuality in a James Bond film.

I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with people who prefer their same sex. But adding it into a film just to bring in even more realistic life stuff and character development, then it would be very wrong.

[zencat]

Here comes the Bond 22 tabloid trash. I really don't relish the idea of two years of this kind of junk. Be nice if we could just ignore these stories (Eon style). I mean, we're all smart enough by now to recognize these things for what they all -- pure invention, pure fiction, pure trash.

[Four-of-a-Kind]

bunch of bs. end of discusion.

[x 440Magnum x]

Ah, I apologize for bringing it up then. I'm not very familiar with the stream of Bond gossip. Usually just watch the movies, play the games, and call it good. :-P

[DLibrasnow]

I mean, we're all smart enough by now to recognize these things for what they all -- pure invention, pure fiction, pure trash.

Yes, but we as Bond fans also dismissed the late 2000 rumors of Bond 20 featuring the manipulation of DNA to change the villain's identity. I think one Bond fan said that was too Man from UNCLE-ish.

So you just never know.

[JimmyBond]

Ah, I apologize for bringing it up then. I'm not very familiar with the stream of Bond gossip. Usually just watch the movies, play the games, and call it good. :-P

May I ask why you waited till you found something stupid like this to register here? Perhaps it was to rile us up, there's a word for that you know, it starts with t and ends with roll.

[shady ginzo]

I think, to be fair on 440magnum, any bond related story picked up on is worth diuscussion, and if you can't do it here then where else!

fair enough there's very few, if any, who would take this particularly crediably but one thing which I can point out is that this exact same rumour turned up before Die Another Day and Casino Royale (it was "reported" that Gustav Graves and Zao were to be lovers, with a reasonably contravercial level of depiction) and when they were hunting for a new bond, Homosexual bond was on the list with Black Bond and Female Bond. all of these turned out to be equally true, ie, not.

good chatch, if a little groan worthy!

[zencat]

Yes, but we as Bond fans also dismissed the late 2000 rumors of Bond 20 featuring the manipulation of DNA to change the villain's identity. I think one Bond fan said that was too Man from UNCLE-ish.

So you just never know.

In this case, we know.

[pleiades1165]

Ah, I apologize for bringing it up then. I'm not very familiar with the stream of Bond gossip. Usually just watch the movies, play the games, and call it good. :-P

May I ask why you waited till you found something stupid like this to register here? Perhaps it was to rile us up, there's a word for that you know, it starts with t and ends with roll.

That's pretty harsh. I'd wait a while before branding someone as a troll. I actually saw that rumor on some other message board and other people believed it.

[Cody]

I can't wait until the Bond/Felix love montage.

[killkenny kid]

o.k. next thread.

[dinovelvet]

My perusings of the internet found this, so I thought I'd bring it here.

http://www.abc4.com/...F0-DB8BB8D1BB90

I think full frontal nudity and homosexual scenes are not characteristic of James Bond movies. Casino Royale was on the line of what defines a true Bond movie for me....and I think it might slip off my radar which much more in the way of deviations. Nothing against homosexuals...but he's defined in part by his flings with women..

What do you think?

I think this is only worth about a 4/10 on the trollometer. Have to try something more original next time.

[jaguar007]

This will happen when Sean Connery plays the villian and Roger Moore plays Bond's mother!

[x 440Magnum x]

Mainly because I was wondering what the feedback of the Bond community would be, seeing as how I've been a fan for a long time. I've never had any need to just discuss Bond on a forum outside of my friends. I was just bringing something where more people could talk about what they thought...the topic struck me as interesting (and alarming to some degree) , and it didn't occur to me that it could just be tabloid trash because it was on a couple mainstream websites (liberal and conservative alike).

I'm actually glad I did it, because now I realize the poparazzi is after Bond too. I knew Daniel Craig was the new Bond, and I knew there was a little controversy over that, but you'd be more likely to find me wondering about what the next plot, next Bond car, and the next set of gadgets or guns will be. Sorry again if I riled anyone up, it wasn't my intention at all.

Edited by x 440Magnum x, 30 November 2006 - 10:24 PM.

[Athena007]

It's ok 440Mag... a number of us just get irked by tabloid trash especially when it comes near our James Bond. You know.

Though... interestingly enough... the "James Bond" like man in the New Doctor Who (Captain Jack Harkness) flirts with anyone and it works. But... no, with the real James Bond I think the only time I wouldn't mind seeing him flirt with a man would be if he were "working undercover" you know.

And why am I finishing all my paragraphs with you know? You know. ha ha

[00Twelve]

Pretty sure it'd be a bad idea to return to Fleming, then on Fleming by doing that with Bond.

[x 440Magnum x]

I guess I just need a movie or two before I'm certain of Craig, until then I'll need to think twice about everything I read about him.

[zencat]

It's starting to smell a lot like moo moo in here.

[Genrewriter]

I thought I smelled hamburgers.

[db5]

I do hope this is just a bad tabloid thing, but when they directly quote Daniel Craig it does seem as for reel.

[mcsearg]

Here comes the Bond 22 tabloid trash. I really don't relish the idea of two years of this kind of junk. Be nice if we could just ignore these stories (Eon style). I mean, we're all smart enough by now to recognize these things for what they all -- pure invention, pure fiction, pure trash.

Zen, I couldnt agree with you more. Im not looking forward to 2 years of this sort of foolishness. Wait, this just in! Tabloids claim Elvis will make his return as long as he can be the next Bond villain.. Ugh. OOTwelve said it best, why reenergize the franchise by going almost pure Fleming, then just abandon him one movie later...

Edited by mcsearg, 30 November 2006 - 11:02 PM.

[Athena007]

I do hope this is just a bad tabloid thing, but when they directly quote Daniel Craig it does seem as for reel.

Ya db5... but I recall someone taking a quote from Craig and ended up turning it into a tabloid about how Craig would be kissing a man in Casino Royale. Well, I saw no man kiss in Casino Royale. (I was in Vancouver BC last week and 3/4th of the people I mentioned Bond too said... doesn't he kiss a man in this one?) So I do wonder if these are real quotes or quotes referring to other movies because this now just seems like a tabloid attack on Daniel Craig's sexuality or something of the like.

[Cody]

Yet I've never seen anything like this come out of an on-camera interview. It's almost as if, with text you can alter what someone says and/or the context in any way you want, or even completely fabricate a story. Hmm...

[Athena007]

Hum... interesting... I think you're onto something, Cody! hee hee

[bonds_walther]

What a load of old sh** - pure and simple.

Edited by bonds_walther, 30 November 2006 - 11:06 PM.

[x 440Magnum x]

Well I guess you've saved one poor victim from the horrors of tabloidization. Thanks guys for not hanging me right off. Here's to a brilliant #22! I'll put it out of my mind until the reviews for that one are out.

Discussion over for 2ish years as far as I'm concerned. Unless someone gets Craig in a face to face 60 Minutes feature. :-P.

I'm willing to bet someone pushed it on Craig in a stressed press interview where they were firing off questions, if it even happened at all. A question "Do you think there's any possibility that..." can very quickly become "This actor is urging producers to do this....", even if he was just merely trying not to offend people.

I think I get it.

Edited by x 440Magnum x, 30 November 2006 - 11:12 PM.