Would the [insert community of choice] community view Bond films any differently than the mainstream?
I tend to think Bond films become camp in retrospect. At the time of, er, release (sorry), they tend to be viewed as modern and of their day.
Is Casino Royale camp? Not for my reading but looking at this thread, I can see the stuff in there. I know Mad Mikkelson has stated that he wanted to put some ambiguity in the torture scene but it is more painful than sexual. Even in the novel. But I guess the basic premise has connotations.
I know gay Bond fans, female Bond fans, various ethnic Bond fans and international Bond fans and they all rarely bring their "community" into the picture. Even just Fan Bond Fans can rarely agree on what and who their Bond is. While interesting, I tend to think questions like this are always a bit reductive.
"A bit reductive"...? With the greatest of respect Ace, I threw this notion into the cBn pot as I am tired of the jaded and extremely "reductive" threads knocking about here debating such far-reaching topics such as how red the colour of the gunbarrel blood CASINO ROYALE should be, how exactly a very competent actor such as Daniel Craig should really utter THAT closing line and whether VESPER has sugar or sweeteners on her cereal in the Hotel Splendide breakast bar!
I know it's all horses for courses and this forum and this website is still the most astute, varied and informed watering hole when it comes to all things 007. I am not trying to be reductive. This topic is not something I have had sleepless nights over. It is just something I would like to investigate with folk - including you - if they want to.
For a gay audience, the torture scene in CASINO ROYALE is both "painful" AND "sexual". That is because Daniel Craig is extremely sexual (in a way that Connery was in the 1960's - well, my Mum thought so...!). And Craig's also butt naked. That has never been seen before in Bond. Neither has an actor who is so physically toned (too much probably) and sexually predatory (itself a major gay trait and one that BOND has thrived on for decades). It is this new sexuality in Bond that I want to discuss and throw out there.
As regards your opening statement on this post ("Would the [insert community of choice] community view Bond films any differently than the mainstream?"), I would like to suggest - for a crude, simplistic counterpoint - that black audiences in the 1970's looked very differently at the franchise.
I hope this isn't meant to sound like an attack, Ace. Far from it. I agree with you that Bond shouldn't be cut apart and ruined by any discussion of this nature. Though I would like to point out that the "mainstream" does not exist in the way that "the general audience" does not.