13 replies to this topic

[Felix's lighter]

I've always thought one of the elements that made the Bond films unique was the chemistry between Bond and his leading ladies, particularly in the Connery and Moore years. The Connery years were especially unique in that so many of the plots hinged on Bond's ability to seduce the leading lady (FRWL, GF, TB).

Obviously, Bond's girls have a great deal to do with the successful formula of the series. However, in recent years I've been finding too much of a tendency for the writers to throw a girl into the script, develop no chemistry between she and Bond whatsoever, and then have them - like clockwork - fall into bed with each other at the end. TND is a prime example: Bond and Wai Lin's character develop a great professional relationship, but there's no indication earlier in the movie that it would ever develop beyond that. Other offenders have included Christmas Jones in TWINE, Pam Bouvier in LTK and Stacey Sutton in AVTAK (well, the last two are RELATIVELY recent anyway). None of these women show any particular attraction to Bond, yet - like clockwork - they fall into bed with him.

I think it's that aspect that feminists find most offensive about the series - that the "girls" are just supposed to fall into Bond's arms without his even trying or regardless if it has any relevance to the plot.

[kevrichardson]

Part of this has been the trend toward the "female Bond" . Which started in 1977 with "TSWLM" and has continued with the exception Kara Milovy in "TLD" . It's a reaction to the feminist thought that Bond women were just playthings . But in fact back then during Connery they were women of action . I think "Jinx" like Win-Lin is a prime example of your point. I started a post on the theme of a return to a Domino/Tracy type of Bond 21. After "Jinx" in DAD the super bitch concept has been beaten to death.

[BONDFINESSE 007]

Originally posted by Felix's lighter
I've always thought one of the elements that made the Bond films unique was the chemistry between Bond and his leading ladies, particularly in the Connery and Moore years. The Connery years were especially unique in that so many of the plots hinged on Bond's ability to seduce the leading lady (FRWL, GF, TB).  

Obviously, Bond's girls have a great deal to do with the successful formula of the series. However, in recent years I've been finding too much of a tendency for the writers to throw a girl into the script, develop no chemistry between she and Bond whatsoever, and then have them - like clockwork - fall into bed with each other at the end. TND is a prime example: Bond and Wai Lin's character develop a great professional relationship, but there's no indication earlier in the movie that it would ever develop beyond that. Other offenders have included Christmas Jones in TWINE, Pam Bouvier in LTK and Stacey Sutton in AVTAK (well, the last two are RELATIVELY recent anyway). None of these women show any particular attraction to Bond, yet - like clockwork - they fall into bed with him.  

I think it's that aspect that feminists find most offensive about the series - that the "girls" are just supposed to fall into Bond's arms without his even trying or regardless if it has any relevance to the plot.

what man would not fall in bed with christmas jones??????? bond aint stupid;)

[Felix's lighter]

"what man would not fall in bed with christmas jones??????? bond aint stupid"

Yeah, but that's not the point. What made HER want to fall into bed with HIM, considering he's about 25 years older and he never even tried very hard to seduce her? I guess there was that whole saving her life thing, but that's de rigueur in a Bond film...

[Kara Milovy]

Well, women throwing themselves at Bond without provocation started in Dr. No with Sylvia Trench -- the very first Bond girl. However, I do know what you're saying. There are times when all Bond has to do is walk in a room and everyone wants him. I don't find that anti-feminist, as the women are choosing and active, yet it's ridiculous and, moreover, bad writing.

One of the worst examples of this is NSNA, in which 3 different women throw themselves at the elderly and pauncy Bond the moment they lay eyes on him.

In all of the other Connery movies, the attraction was believable, because Connery is the kind of virile, feral man that women do throw themselves at. But then Moore came along, and all you can say about Moore is that he's pretty, or "good looking," but he's not virile, he's not animalistic, and he's not believable as an object of instant and uncontrollable lust.

If you look at Moore's movies, the first one has him with three women -- Miss Caruso had been seduced before the movie began, Rosie slept with him as a Mata Hari ploy, and he tricked Solitaire. So LALD ended with us never seeing Moore actually seduce anyone. In TMWTGG Andrea saw Bond as a savior and gave her body in exchange for her freedom, and Goodnight, again, was seduced at some time prior to the movie's beginning.

Now we reach TSWLM, and here we have the beginning of women throwing themselves into Moore's arms for no reason at all, with no time passing at all -- the first one is Fekish's wife, who dies before much of anything happens.

I disagree about Pam in LTK; they had just had an adventure together, which is an exciting experience, and excitement often leads to arousal. I disagree also about Wei Lin; I think professional respect and camaraderie can easily lead to attraction. But I agree about Christmas Jones, who was just the only survivor of the movie.

With Jinx, I think we have a very specific character. She is an adventurer and is surrounded by people who have no sense of adventure. She wants a fling and she wants to be noticed -- Bond notices her. It is a mutual flirtation.

[BONDFINESSE 007]

Originally posted by Felix's lighter
"what man would not fall in bed with christmas jones??????? bond aint stupid"

Yeah, but that's not the point. What made HER want to fall into bed with HIM, considering he's about 25 years older and he never even tried very hard to seduce her? I guess there was that whole saving her life thing, but that's de rigueur in a Bond film...

well if i was a woman i would want to go to bed with bond, i would not care if hes 25, 35 0r 45 years older then me, u could say that christmas knew a good thing when she saw it, and she wanted it

[BONDFINESSE 007]

AND SHE GOT IT

[Felix's lighter]

"In all of the other Connery movies, the attraction was believable, because Connery is the kind of virile, feral man that women do throw themselves at. But then Moore came along, and all you can say about Moore is that he's pretty, or "good looking," but he's not virile, he's not animalistic, and he's not believable as an object of instant and uncontrollable lust."

OK, I find this statement just short of offensive. So "virile, feral" men always reduce women to raging whores? You gotta be kidding me - that's the kind of **** women have been accusing men of for decades now. And not even being "good-looking" is enough to gain this kind of "animalistic" attraction? Are modern women plain animalistic? If that's the case, maybe there should be mroe Sean Connery Bond types to keep them well in hand.

[Mr. Kidd]

One of my favorite aspects of TMWTGG is Bond's seeming indifference to
Goodnight's charms until the end when he realizes he is stuck on a junk
with her the whole trip. Clearly even though she is hot, her dizziness is
a turn-off to the sophisticated Bond and he is not in the least receptive
to her advances. Not typical for 007!

[Kara Milovy]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Felix's lighter
OK, I find this statement just short of offensive. So "virile, feral" men always reduce women to raging whores? [/quote]

[/B][/QUOTE]
The part that's offensive is saying that a woman who choose to be sexually aggressive is a "raging whore." Feminism is all about women being allowed to make their own sexual choices, without people like you punishing them with names like "whore."

In a conversation about sexual attraction, I don't think it's unreasonable to define what constitutes sexual attraction. If this offends you, maybe you shouldn't have clicked on the folder.

[quote]"that's the kind of **** women have been accusing men of for decades now. [/quote]

Wait, you lost me. Women have been accusing men of...what? Of assuming they find some men attractive? Of having animalistic sexuality? I don't want to wake you up or anything, but sexuality is animalistic.

[quote]And not even being "good-looking" is enough to gain this kind of "animalistic" attraction? Are modern women plain animalistic? If that's the case, maybe there should be mroe Sean Connery Bond types to keep them well in hand. [/quote]So your problem is, what? That you think you don't measure up? Connery was voted the sexiest man alive by People Magazine when he was near 70 years old, so I guess that yes, most women would appreciate more Connery types around. "Are modern women plain animalistic?" Yes. And modern men. And old fashioned women. And old fashioned men. Sexual desire is an animal urge. Get over it.

[Honey Rider]

Originally posted by Felix's lighter

None of these women show any particular attraction to Bond, yet - like clockwork - they fall into bed with him.  

I understand them. Rather Mr Bond than Mr Goldfinger,
If i may express myself this way...Personally I'm not very
attraced to half-bald men with their focus on hijacking huge bank-accounts, worldpower, assasination and stuff like that...

Besides, I think is part of the story. But I see your point.

[Felix's lighter]

"I guess that yes, most women would appreciate more Connery types around. "Are modern women plain animalistic?" Yes. And modern men. And old fashioned women. And old fashioned men. Sexual desire is an animal urge. Get over it."

Well, babe, if that's what women REALLY want, don't whine and bitch to the courts when "animalistic" type men attempt to have their way with you. Let us not forget that Connery's Bond was someone who forced himself on women on several occasions and slapped them around when he felt the need warranted it. The real-life Connery was not much better, having made his positions on those matters clear in the infamous 1965 Playboy interview.

If Connery treatment is what you want, then Connery treatment is what men can easily provide.Just don't expect us to be "sensitive" at the same time.

[Kara Milovy]

Well, babe, if that's what women REALLY want, don't whine and bitch to the courts when "animalistic" type men attempt to have their way with you.

This is the most anti-feminist statement of all, the statement that a woman either must suppress every hint of sexuality, or that she's "asking for it." No, babe, I do not believe that any man has the right to force himself, and I do not believe that women who are willing to be open about the animal side of sexuality are undeserving of legal protections.

If you say that people have a natural urge to express their anger, does that mean you have no legal recourse when beaten up? Of course not. Animal and consensual are not opposite, babe.

The real-life Connery was not much better, having made his positions on those matters clear in the infamous 1965 Playboy interview.

I knew you would bring that up. I've read the interview, have you? The interviewer asked if Connery thought it was okay to hit a woman. Setting aside his answer for a moment, imagine living in a time period when an interviewer considers that a legitimate question, when women had no legal protection against domestic violence, and it was considered so normal and common that it was an acceptable topic for conversation. It was like asking, "Do you think it's okay to wear white after Labor Day?"

Times have changed. It is remotely possible that a man's attitude can change over the course of thirty-eight years.

And if not? That's the joy of movies. I see Mr. Connery only on-screen, where he is virile and exciting. I don't have to sit down and have a conversation with him. If you don't understand that Connery is virile and exciting, then you don't understand a large part of Bond's appeal.

Why don't you run a poll, and ask EVERY WOMAN on the board if they find Connery's Bond exciting?

[Simon]

Just as a break to the ongoing conversation between Kara and Felix, I could never really understand or get excited about the "relationship" between Bond and Wei Lin, or Bond and Christmas.

Wei Lin and Bond had a great professional relationship as stated above and I think this could have been quite a change of pace if they had just left the film toasting each other's skills, as it were. Aside from the look Bond gave Wei in her gadget room, there really wasn't anything else.

Christmas Jones, well, that scene was just stapled to the end. Totally redundant, but as she was the only girl alive by the end of the film, discounting Moneypenny and the doctor, I'm not sure who else he could have finished up with. Zero chemistry, zero interest.