54 replies to this topic

[solitaire]

Originally posted by brendan007


i have issues with rupert playing bond, and i also dont think there should be 'openly gay' characters in a bond film, am i homophopic too??

YES......

[Mister Asterix]

Why shouldn't there be openly gay characters in the bond films? Fleming wrote gay characters into the novels. Why, because they are interesting. Now Fleming sometimes treated homosexuality as a character flaw, and, in reality, homosexuality can have many flaws that go along with it hand-in-hand. Homosexuals can be prone to depression and other mental problems, but that can be easily attibuted to the extreme pressures that society put onto a person who grows up with an attibute that so many in the world consider 'unnatural'.

My only concern with gay characters in the films would be that they would be treated with kid gloves. That the producers would feel that they shouldn't have flawed gay characters because for fear of offending this minority. But as long as the character is representing the flaws of that character and not attempting to represent the flaws of all homosexuals then why should there be an issue?

I once called insensitive in these forums because I suggested that a henchman be Downs Syndrome. I was told that Downs Syndrome people were happy and gentle people. So apparently it is insensitive to have a character that defies stereotypes.

End of Rambling.

[solitaire]

I agree with some of what you say Mister Asterix,gay characters should'nt be given any special treatment,any more than any other minority. At the same time a characters sexuality should'nt be the thing that defines his deeds. For instance if there was a villian who happened to be gay,his or hers sexuality should'nt be the reason they are the bad guy. My point is,whatever bad happens to them in the end,should'nt come down to villifying them for their sexuality. Btw mental health is not a gay problem,everyone is prone to mental illness.

As for Ian Fleming having gay characters in the novels,I would hope and pray no gay character was based on his dated,and homophobic material. The man was racist,homophobic,and misogynistic,all rolled into one. Then again he was also a product of his times.

[1q2w3e4r]

Listen pal. I've been polite, these are public forums. But seriously Im sick of this **** about homofobio. So stop pushing it. I don't care if your straight, gay or asexual. I said in an early post if you'd BOTHERED TO READ IT that there a plenty of movies out there with gay characters that you could watch. But that its not suitable for what are now family films.

I really don't understand what your on about, its never going to happen and a little civility and politeness on your behalf might go a long way. In future refrain from pushing your insecurities onto me thanks.

I said that we don't know for sure that any character apart from the women who've slept with Bond are hetrosexual. If it helps, think of the rest as gay.

Why are you really even on these forums? Your obviously not a very big fan of the series, you've constantly bashed Bond, Ian Fleming in the post above and think that Madonna's involvement dwarfs the project.

I already said why i didn't think Everett should play Bond. I think Hugh Jackman's better suited and younger to considering that Bond 22 won't turn out till 2006 or so.

[brendan007]

im not homophobic at all, and quite frankly i dont care what solitaire thinks anymore. i too gave reasons why the bond series doesnt need gay characters, and if solitaire thinks im homophobic thats too bad.
btw solitaire, just to satisfy my curiosity, can u whistle?

[1q2w3e4r]

HAhahahaha ahhh. That's a good one. Definantly an underrated novel in my opinion.

[Mister Asterix]

Alright, anymore talk suggesting another forum member is homophobic or homosexual will be deleted. Lets have some respect for each other here. This goes for everybody.

Originally posted by solitaire (edited)
Btw mental health is not a gay problem,everyone is prone to mental illness.

True, but homosexuals can have more societal pressures put on them that can lead to mental problems.

[solitaire]

Originally posted by 1q2w3e4r
Listen pal. I've been polite, these are public forums. But seriously Im sick of this **** about homofobio. So stop pushing it. I don't care if your straight, gay or asexual. I said in an early post if you'd BOTHERED TO READ IT that there a plenty of movies out there with gay characters that you could watch. But that its not suitable for what are now family films.

I really don't understand what your on about, its never going to happen and a little civility and politeness on your behalf might go a long way. In future refrain from pushing your insecurities onto me thanks.

I said that we don't know for sure that any character apart from the women who've slept with Bond are hetrosexual. If it helps, think of the rest as gay.

Why are you really even on these forums? Your obviously not a very big fan of the series, you've constantly bashed Bond, Ian Fleming in the post above and think that Madonna's involvement dwarfs the project.

I already said why i didn't think Everett should play Bond. I think Hugh Jackman's better suited and younger to considering that Bond 22 won't turn out till 2006 or so.

I have actually read everything you posted on this thread,and I stand by my statements. I think I have been polite and civil,but I won't be insulted. Anyway when did Bond become family fare?
I post on this forum because I am a BOND FAN. Unlike a lot of the posters here,my life does'nt revolve around Bond.

[solitaire]

Originally posted by brendan007
im not homophobic at all, and quite frankly i dont care what solitaire thinks anymore. i too gave reasons why the bond series doesnt need gay characters, and if solitaire thinks im homophobic thats too bad.
btw solitaire, just to satisfy my curiosity, can u whistle?

No I can't whistle:rolleyes:

[solitaire]

Originally posted by Mister Asterix
Alright, anymore talk suggesting another forum member is homophobic or homosexual will be deleted. Lets have some respect for each other here. This goes for everybody.



True, but homosexuals can have more societal pressures put on them that can lead to mental problems.

I'm gay,and I don't have a mental illness,neither do any of the gay people I know,and gay people are certainly not interested in seeing some crazy gay villian in a Bond film.

[Mister Asterix]

Originally posted by solitaire
I'm gay,and I don't have a mental illness,neither do any of the gay people I know,and gay people are certainly not interested in seeing some crazy gay villian in a Bond film.

Fair enough. I have met quite a few gay people who suffered from depression, low self-esteem, or some other mental problem or were suicidal. (I also know a many homosexuals who have their heads on straight.) It may just have been a coincidence that a higher than normal amount of gay people that I've met have had such problems and I wouldn't be entirely surprised if that were the case. I personally feel it is how society treats the homosexual that causes such problems. One of the reasons I feel this is that I have also noticed that as homosexuality has become more widely accepted I have met drastically less homosexuals with such issues. So I would think that a 'crazy' gay villain would have been more likely in Fleming's time then it would now.

I am just curious, solitaire, how would you have felt had any of the previous Bond villains had been gay? No other major changes to the character or plot only a change to the main villains sexual preference. What if Zorin was gay? What if they would have said that Scarmanga only slept with women before a kill, but was with men the rest of the time? What if Carver was gay and Paris was only a 'beard'? And what about other characters? What if it is revealed that Robinson is gay? Or M? What about Saunders?

Personally, I think any of these could have spiced things up a bit as long as there was a balance in the long run.

[marktmurphy]

Didn't Ian Fleming once say: 'gay men can't whistle'.

I'm not going anywhere with that, I just think its quite a funny thing to say.

[solitaire]

Originally posted by marktmurphy
Didn't Ian Fleming once say: 'gay men can't whistle'.

I'm not going anywhere with that, I just think its quite a funny thing to say.

Fleming was an idiot about a lot of things;)

[solitaire]

Originally posted by Mister Asterix


I am just curious, solitaire, how would you have felt had any of the previous Bond villains had been gay? No other major changes to the character or plot only a change to the main villains sexual preference. What if Zorin was gay? What if they would have said that Scarmanga only slept with women before a kill, but was with men the rest of the time? What if Carver was gay and Paris was only a 'beard'? And what about other characters? What if it is revealed that Robinson is gay? Or M? What about Saunders?

Personally, I think any of these could have spiced things up a bit as long as there was a balance in the long run.[/font]

I think it would have been great if some of the past Bond villains were gay. Scarmanga being gay would be too weird,only sleeping with women,just to kill them in the end? That type of portrayal could set gay people back 100 years. The rest of your suggestions would be cool though,paarticularly M,who is so gay anyway;)

Btw I think I mentioned a while ago,that it would have so sweet if Gustav Graves and Zao were lovers in DAD. I will admit that was mainly because I think Tobey Stephens and Rick Yune are gorgeous. But that's just my personal fantasy.

[Mister Asterix]

Originally posted by solitaire


Fleming was an idiot about a lot of things;)

It was the 1950s, a lot of people were idiots about a lot of things. Fleming was tame by comparison to some,

[IrishCrown]

Rupert will be be Bond. Elton John will do the theme. Joel Schumacher will direct. George Michael will make a cameo.

[solitaire]

Originally posted by IrishCrown
Rupert will be be Bond.  Elton John will do the theme.  Joel Schumacher will direct.  George Michael will make a cameo.

Now how many tense days of deep thinking did it take for you to come of with this "brilliant" idea;)

[JackChase007]

I think there are many other more competant actors out there more suited to play Bond. More notably Hugh Jackman (although I'd rather see him as Clive Cussler's Dirk Pitt, but those of us who follow that whole story know that it just ain't gonna happen!) or even Clive Owen.

And Solitaire, I don't think it's very fair to attack other Bond fans "whose lives revolve around Bond", as you put it. Some of us are just really into the whole thing. We've had this discussion before on what a Bond Fan is - it's up to you. It's your decision on how much you want to put your time into it, etc. I can't say what kind of a fan you are, because I don't know what you consider a fan as, or to what degree you like Bond.

Can't we all just get along???

[solitaire]

Originally posted by JackChase007
I think there are many other more competant actors out there more suited to play Bond.  More notably Hugh Jackman (although I'd rather see him as Clive Cussler's Dirk Pitt, but those of us who follow that whole story know that it just ain't gonna happen!) or even Clive Owen.

And Solitaire, I don't think it's very fair to attack other Bond fans "whose lives revolve around Bond", as you put it.  Some of us are just really into the whole thing.  We've had this discussion before on what a Bond Fan is - it's up to you.  It's your decision on how much you want to put your time into it, etc.  I can't say what kind of a fan you are, because I don't know what you consider a fan as, or to what degree you like Bond.

Can't we all just get along???

Getting along is not really the issue,respect is. In order to give respect,one must recieve it also,quid pro quo. I don't feel I was "attacking" anyone,just staing my opinion,like everyone else was. I don't think people have the right to be insulting just because they are "Bond fans". I never go out of my way to attack anyone,unless i'm attacked first.

I love Bond films (since I was a kid actually) but i'm not blinded by the flaws in them. The fact that I love the series so much is one of the resons I want them to evolve and get better. I'm not stuck Bond's antiquated past,because I live in the now,and am looking to the future. I have to honestly say this is the first Bond film that i'm actually looking forward to in years.

Btw I have never read Clive Cussler,is he any good?

[JackChase007]

Cussler's fantastic, as long as you enjoy a great adventure novel. He creates some incredible plots, and his books are the one "thing" (I guess that's how you'd say it) that I enjoy overall more than Bond. If you want to try one of his books, I highly recommend trying "Night Probe!" Bond actually has a cameo in it as an aged superspy brought out of retirement to thwart the hero, Dirk Pitt (it's US versus Britain, with Canadians thrown in there - you'd have to read it to understand it). If you ever have the time, give it a shot.

[solitaire]

Thanks,it sounds really interesting. I will definetely check it out.

[JackChase007]

Go for it. If you have an appreciation for Bond, it's definately going to help. If you ever want more info., Solitaire, just lemme know - I can give you a list of every one of his books.

[JackChase007]

And really, the pleasure is all mine - I'm always trying to get more people to read Cussler. Hope you enjoy...

[solitaire]

Do the books have to be read in sequence,or does each noel stand on it's own?

[JackChase007]

It's a series of books following daring adventurer Dirk Pitt, and they do have a certain order to them, but it's not that important. Each novel will make some sort of reference to events that occurred in the previous one, but plots don't depend on other books. The first novel Cussler wrote was Pacific Vortex, the first Pitt adventure (although it was not the first one published; that was The Mediterranean Caper), but it does not compare to his later works. His first three (PV, MC, and Iceberg) follow a very basic formula, but it was in his fourth novel (and most popular among fans), Raise The Titanic (actually, it was made into a horrible film in 1980 - Cussler has since refused to sell his books to Hollywood unless he had casting, director, and screenplay approval, which he is finally getting, and they're going to begin production on the first film, Sahara, in spring 2004) that introduced a very unique style, with complex plots. If you want to start with Pacific Vortex, that could be good too, but just keep in mind - they do get better. It's not his best.